共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 332 毫秒
1.
Sally Morris 《Learned Publishing》2003,16(3):171-176
There is increasing pressure from academia to make the results of publicly funded research freely available to all. Preprint archives have grown up in some disciplines, and institutional archives are now being developed. While openly accessible preprints seem to have damaged publishers less than was originally feared, the final published versions of articles – when combined with sophisticated retrieval software – may turn out to be a different matter. Publishers have already done much to make their content more accessible through bundling, consortia licensing, access for less‐developed countries, more liberal customer and author agreements, and collective licensing. Some are experimenting with open access journals, although this may not work in all disciplines. It seems clear, however, that there are elements of value in journals themselves, and in the functions performed by journal publishers, which should survive. 相似文献
2.
3.
Bhaskar MUKHERJEE 《Learned Publishing》2014,27(1):21-32
This paper examines the characteristics of 462 open access (OA) journals being published in India under the green, gold and hybrid models. The sample of journals was selected from DOAJ, IndianJournal.com and Open J‐Gate. Journal characteristics were measured in terms of growth, subjects, publishers, and citations under each model. While characteristics such as growth, subject, and publisher have been identified by exploring the journal's website only, the citation count of these journals has been calculated by using Google Scholar and the Indian Citation Index. The gold road is now the most popular form of OA publishing in the subcontinent. There is a great variation in the size of OA journals and in their publishers. One publisher has more than 77 journals, but 264 publishers publish a single journal only. Overall, the OA journal landscape is greatly influenced by a few key publishers and journals. While 43% of journals charge publication fees and the fees vary from as low as US$10 to as high as US$400, the highest impact factor of the gold OA journals has been noted as 0.58. The data presented here suggest that publication fees are not a major barrier to authorship within the fields of computer science, pharmacy, and medicine. 相似文献
4.
5.
The individual members of 35 UK learned societies were surveyed on their attitudes to open access (OA); 1,368 responses were received. Most respondents said they knew what OA was, and supported the idea of OA journals. However, although 60% said that they read OA journals and 25% that they published in them, in both cases around one‐third of the journals named were not OA. While many were in favour of increased access through OA journals, concerns were expressed about the cost to authors, possible reduction in quality, and negative impact on existing journals, publishers, and societies. By contrast, less than half knew what self‐archiving was; 36% thought it was a good idea and 50% were unsure. Just under half said they used repositories of self‐archived articles, but 13% of references were not in fact to self‐archiving repositories. 29% said they self‐archived their own articles, but 10% of references were not to publicly accessible sites of any kind. The access and convenience of self‐archiving repositories were seen as positive, but there were concerns about quality control, workload for authors and institutions, chaotic proliferation of versions, and potential damage to existing journals, publishers, and societies. 相似文献
6.
In this paper we map the scientific journals from Ibero‐American countries indexed in the Web of Science and Scopus. Data were collected from the journals' websites. Of 879 journals in the two databases, Spain accounted for 35.6% of the titles, Brazil 28.5%, and the remaining 11 countries together 35.9%. Medicine had the most titles in almost all countries, with 28.9% of the total, followed by agricultural and biological sciences (particularly in Brazil) with 14.9%, and social sciences with 11.5%. A digital format was used by 95% of the journals and 82% were open access, with an even higher level of open access in Latin America. The publishers were mainly universities (37.7%) and associations (31.1%). Ibero‐American countries, with the exception of Spain, do not have a long tradition as scientific journal publishers, but in the last few years they have gained in importance as players in scientific communication with the use of new business models for journals. 相似文献
7.
国外学术期刊OA出版论文处理费(APC)调查 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
调查了国际知名出版商Elsevier、Springer、Taylor & Francis、Wiley-Blackwell、NPG和国际知名OA期刊社BMC、PLoS、Hindawi、MDPI等OA期刊的论文处理费(APC)的收费标准.2015年度主要商业性出版社完全OA期刊的APC主要分布在1 000 ～5 000美元之间,混合型OA期刊的APC相对高些,分布较窄,基本在3 000美元左右.以瑞士MDPI公司为案例,分析该公司OA期刊的创办、期刊载文量、期刊经营、APC收取策略等.还简要讨论APC和OA出版机制,以期为我国的科研管理部门和期刊管理部门提供参考. 相似文献
8.
The article processing charge (APC) is currently the primary method of funding professionally published open access (OA) peer‐reviewed journals. The pricing principles of 77 OA publishers publishing over 1,000 journals using APCs were studied and classified. The most commonly used pricing method is a single fixed fee, which can either be the same for all of a publisher's journals or individually determined for each journal. Fees are usually only levied for publication of accepted papers, but there are some journals that also charge submission fees. Instead of fixed prices, many publishers charge by the page or have multi‐tiered fees depending on the length of articles. The country of origin of the author can also influence the pricing, in order to facilitate publishing for authors from developing countries. 相似文献
9.
Penetration of Nigerian predatory biomedical open access journals 2007–2012: a bibliometric study 
下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 This paper presents the bibliometric characteristics of 32 biomedical open access journals published by Academic Journals and International Research Journals – the two Nigerian publishers in Jeffery Beall's list of 23 predatory open access publishers in 2012. Data about the journals and the authors of their articles were collected from the websites of the publishers, Google Scholar and Web of Science. As at December 2012, the journals had together produced a total of 5,601 papers written by 5,599 authors, and received 12,596 citations. Authors from Asia accounted for 56.79% of the publications; those from Africa wrote 28.35% while Europe contributed 7.78%. Authors from Africa accounted for 18.25% of the citations these journals received, and this is about one‐third the number of citations by authors in Asia (54.62%). At country level, India ranks first in the top 10 citer countries, while Nigeria, the host country of the journals, ranked eighth. More in‐depth studies are required to develop further information about the journals such as how much scientific information the journals contain, as well as the science literacy of the authors and the editorial. 相似文献
10.
This study examines aspects of scholarly journal publishing in the Nordic countries. On average half of Nordic journals publish online. In most Nordic countries, commercial publishers predominate; however, in Finland the majority are society publishers. The number of open access journals is low, in line with international figures. There is concern to maintain local languages in journal publishing. A majority of the journals publishing in local languages are within social science, humanities, and arts; the STM sector publishes in English. English‐language publications are favoured in research assessments, international recognition, and impact, while the visibility of local‐language scholarly journals in international databases is low. The Nordbib program supports Nordic scholarly journals and fosters co‐operation with publishing companies and learned societies over migration to e‐publishing; it also supports open access. The article discusses future challenges for journal publishing, pointing out the problems of small journal publishers and the need for co‐operation between stakeholders. 相似文献
11.
12.
Based on the 1,608 journals covered by the Chinese Science & Technology Journal Citation Reports (2005 edition), we analyzed the open access (OA) publishing situation of Chinese scientific journals. From this database we identified 91 journals offering full OA; a further 139 journals offered delayed OA. Data collected at three different time points (January 2006, July 2006, and January 2007) showed that the OA status of these journals is not stable; some OA journals subsequently became non‐OA. Most of the Chinese OA journals are not part of a larger aggregation, but are published independently. Relatively more OA journals are published in the fields of medicine and biology. Citation indicators of OA journals were found to be higher than those of non‐OA journals. 相似文献
13.
Surveys were carried out to learn more about authors and open access publishing. Awareness of open access journals among those who had not published in them was quite high; awareness of ‘self‐archiving’ was less. For open access journal authors the most important reason for publishing in that way was the principle of free access; their main concerns were grants and impact. Authors who had not published in an open access journal attributed that to unfamiliarity with such journals. Forty per cent of authors have self‐archived their traditional journal articles and almost twice as many say they would do so if required to. 相似文献
14.
15.
Simon Wakeling Valérie Spezi Jenny Fry Claire Creaser Stephen Pinfield Peter Willett 《Learned Publishing》2017,30(4):301-311
This paper is the first of two Learned Publishing articles in which we report the results of a series of interviews with senior publishers and editors exploring open access megajournals (OAMJs). Megajournals (of which PLoS One is the best known example) represent a relatively new approach to scholarly communication and can be characterized as large, broad‐scope, open access journals that take an innovative approach to peer review, basing acceptance decisions solely on the technical or scientific soundness of the article. This model is often said to support the broader goals of the open science movement. Based on in‐depth interviews with 31 publishers and editors representing 16 different organizations (10 of which publish a megajournal), this paper reports how the term ‘megajournal’ is understood and publishers’ rationale and motivations for launching (or not launching) an OAMJ. We find that while there is general agreement on the common characteristics of megajournals, there is not yet a consensus on their relative importance. We also find seven motivating factors that were said to drive the launch of an OAMJ and link each of these factors to potential societal and business benefits. These results suggest that the often polarized debate surrounding OAMJs is a consequence of the extent to which observers perceive publishers to be motivated by these societal or business benefits. 相似文献
16.
Having found a business opportunity in exploiting the open access publishing model, predatory journals and publishers have been spamming authors with emails, inviting them to submit articles for publication. Authors may be misled by the names of prestigious authors and editors that predatory journals and publishers use to advertise their publishing services, either by claims that those scientists serve on the editorial boards or by sending invitations in their names. Given the fact that detailed knowledge of a journal is required to make an informed decision of whether the inviting journal is predatory or not, junior scientists are not likely to possess the knowledge or skill to make such decisions. In addition, analysis of the details of new suspicious journals and publishers can be a lengthy process or even a waste of time. Therefore, in this paper, we provide an analysis of a likely scenario that many authors are facing nowadays when they take on the difficult task of studying the details of suspicious journals as possible venues for the publication of their research findings. The analysis takes the form of an analysis of the Kenkyu Publishing Group, which is listed on Jeffrey Beall’s list of “predatory” open access publishers. 相似文献
17.
In recent years academic journal publishers have explored a variety of new business models. The Berkeley Electronic Press (bepress), founded by professors in 1999, now publishes 39 electronic‐only journals. bepress's own model rests on three principles: improve, but do not break, the traditional journal; allow non‐subscribers to read articles as guests; and offer reasonable and sustainable prices to libraries. This model has resulted in steady growth. Even in the shifting landscape of open access, there remains a place for professional journal publishers who offer innovative improvements, traditionally qualified content, and reasonable prices. 相似文献
18.
Katherine G. Akers 《Journal of the Medical Library Association》2016,104(2):146-149
Because they do not rank highly in the hierarchy of evidence and are not frequently cited, case reports describing the clinical circumstances of single patients are seldom published by medical journals. However, many clinicians argue that case reports have significant educational value, advance medical knowledge, and complement evidence-based medicine. Over the last several years, a vast number (∼160) of new peer-reviewed journals have emerged that focus on publishing case reports. These journals are typically open access and have relatively high acceptance rates. However, approximately half of the publishers of case reports journals engage in questionable or “predatory” publishing practices. Authors of case reports may benefit from greater awareness of these new publication venues as well as an ability to discriminate between reputable and non-reputable journal publishers. 相似文献
19.
[目的/意义] 期刊从订阅模式转向开放获取模式有多种途径,其中"为开放而订阅（S2O）"是一种新兴模型,正越来越受到向开放获取过渡的传统出版商的认可与接纳。[方法/过程] 运用文献调研法与内容分析法,梳理S2O模型的背景、发展,比较9家出版商采用S2O模型的75种期刊的情况。[结果/结论] 指出S2O模型的潜在问题包含订阅机构的流失、图书馆/文献中心的财政预算审查障碍、订阅费用透明度较差;解决措施包括经费补充机制及提供S2O模型期刊的使用数据。从为出版商提供开放获取转换的新途径、有利于保障非营利性出版商的发展两个方面提出S2O开放获取模式,为我国开放获取的理论与实践带来重要启示。 相似文献
20.
Business faculty were surveyed to determine their attitudes toward institutional repositories, disciplinary repositories, and open access journals. The majority of faculty was unaware of institutional repositories at their local institutions. However, approximately one third are using disciplinary repositories and are receiving encouragement from their departments to do so. Likewise, many faculty are unaware of open access journals. Open access journals are seen as lacking prestige and being lower quality publications in the business field due to the lack of prestigious publishers and editors. Many faculty believe their prestige would fall if they published in an open access journal. 相似文献