News Improve digital monographs – report


Oxford University Press and Cambridge University Press have published a report entitled Researcher’s perspectives on the purpose and value of the monograph: Using and engaging with monographs in a digital environment. Following on from a comprehensive report jointly undertaken by the world’s two largest university presses last year and published in October 2019, this new report returns to the original survey results to better understand what readers and researchers need from digital monographs in light of the immediate need for remote learning and research driven by the global COVID-19 pandemic. In the original survey, 5,000 scholars of all ages, nationalities, and career levels in the Humanities and Social Sciences gave their thoughts about reading, writing, and publishing monographs - what they would change if they could improve one aspect? Three distinct themes emerged which this supplementary report probes in more detail. Readers want to see: • Digital options with stellar content; • Enhanced usability; and • A fully functional format. Respondents expressed their


commitment to the monograph but, equally, their desire for the format of digital and e-book editions to be improved and better adapted. David Clark, managing director of the


academic division at Oxford University Press, said: ‘Under radically different circumstances, our study into the monograph continues to guide our response to our users who are now (at times reluctantly) immersed in the online


Preprint journal clubs – invitation to researchers


eLife has partnered with PREreview to bring together scientists globally for a series of virtual discussions around research posted as preprints. These live-streamed discussions, known


world. Although the allure of the page has not dimmed, our authors and readers are encouraging us to create dynamic, interactive works which combine fully integrated multimedia content with core elements of the printed book such as page numbers and the ability to highlight text’. Mandy Hill, managing director of


the academic division at Cambridge University Press, added: ‘It is clear that the possibilities of an increasingly digital future are already crystallising for the readers and writers of the monograph. We are especially keen to explore how the digital monograph has the potential to support the needs of a typical scholar better than the traditional printed format. ‘Our last report concluded that the monograph ‘must evolve to remain relevant….in an increasingly digital world’. That world is now here, the technology exists, the requirements are clear – now we need to harness this with creative thinking to ignite this evolution into a speedier revolution’.


as preprint journal clubs, are taking place once a month for five months. The aim is to help engage diverse groups of researchers in the review of preprints, and to provide their feedback openly so that the preprint authors and other readers can benefit. Each month, the journal club will discuss


a preprint and provide constructive feedback for improving the manuscript. After each call, the PREreview team will work with participants who are interested in helping to collate the main discussion points into a full report, which will then be shared openly on PREreview. The two initiatives have come together


through their common commitment to bring more diversity to peer review, particularly through engaging more early- career researchers in the process. ‘Preprint peer review opens up many


important opportunities for the research community,’ said Jennifer Gibson, eLife head of open research communication. ‘We need help to navigate the huge


volume of preprints being shared, so many will benefit if the dialog around new research is more visible to more people, and early-career researchers need support and recognition. We hope many more will begin to participate, beginning with this series.’


ALPSP shortlists finalists for innovation award


The Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers – ALPSP – has announced its shortlist for the ALPSP Awards for Innovation in Publishing 2020. Applications for the awards were


open to any new development, product, service or project that is both innovative and of significant value to scholarly communication. The winners must demonstrate excellence in terms of originality, innovation, value to the community, utility and long-term viability.


The finalists for 2020 are: • Charlesworth WeChat Gateway • DataSeer • Jus Mundi • Open Library of Humanities • Rigor and Transparency Index powered by


32 Research Information August/September 2020


SciScore • Scholarcy • Select Crowd Review • WordToEPUB


David Sommer, chair of the judging panel, commented: ‘This year we saw a wide range of applications from across the industry which is heartening given the disruption caused by Covid-19. ‘Integrity, access and reproducibility are key themes for many of the submissions and it is exciting to see new developments in these fields. It is never easy for the judging panel to select a shortlist given the breadth of innovation seen in the submissions, and we look forward to discussing each in more detail at the next stage of the judging process.’


Wayne Sime, chief executive of ALPSP, added: ‘Despite a difficult few months for the industry worldwide, we are delighted to have received 34 submissions this year, demonstrating the range of innovation and development in scholarly communication. I look forward to seeing all the finalist organisations at the ALPSP Virtual Conference in September.’ All finalists will present their submission


to the judges in July. They will be also invited to showcase their innovation to industry peers at the ALPSP Awards Lightning session to be held online on Tuesday 8 September.


The winner(s) will be announced on


Wednesday 16 September at the opening of the ALPSP Virtual Conference & Awards 2020.


@researchinfo | www.researchinformation.info


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38