News
Research ‘indicates increasing support for immediate gold OA’ Summary of key findings:
Preprints, accepted manuscripts, and the final published version of record (VOR) mean researchers now have access to increasing multiple versions of research papers. In a white paper, Exploring researcher preference for the version of record, produced in collaboration with data from ResearchGate, Springer Nature seeks to provide increased understanding into how researchers view these different versions, which they prefer to use and why. The study finds that 83 per cent of
researchers prefer the article VOR over the accepted manuscript (AM) and preprint, both for general reading and citing in their research. They find the VOR easier to read, more reliable, and more authoritative and credible because of the reassurance provided by peer review and proof of publication. In particular, publication in a recognised journal provides a ‘stamp of credibility’ unavailable in earlier versions. Where access to the article VOR is not
available, nearly 9 in 10 researchers will take direct action to gain access to it. In addition, the VOR is the version of their own work authors prefer others to use. Springer Nature says these findings
support the need to widen the availability of article VORs via the gold OA route, as this provides immediate, unrestricted access to the authoritative VOR, and for continued and sustainable funding of gold OA as a critical step to a fully open research future. Steven Inchcoombe, chief publishing
and solutions officer at Springer Nature, said: ‘Overwhelmingly the article VOR is
the version of the manuscript researchers are most comfortable using as reader and author, making this version immediately available via gold OA is where we should all be focusing all our efforts. ‘Attempts to enable the further growth
of green OA and to make AMs more widely available may only add confusion to the scientific record, and do not reflect researcher preference. It is why we are committed to transitioning all primary research we publish to gold OA, so that this authoritative version is immediately available to all. ‘Providing only immediate access to the unfinished accepted manuscript via ‘green’ OA – which does not benefit from post-acceptance improvements to the article – is not linked up with data or code, does not show corrections or retractions, and relies on the continuation of library subscriptions, meaning we risk falling short in delivering on the promise of an open science future, so crucial to the future of the whole research enterprise.’
• Researchers prefer to read and cite the article VOR. 83 per cent of respondents preferred working with the VOR for citing content in their own work, compared with 9 per cent preferring AMs, and 2 per cent preferring preprints;
• Researchers believe the article VOR is easier to read and is more reliable. In open text answers, respondents commented on the reassurance that peer review and proof of publication give to the VOR, pointing to the lack of time researchers have to read a large volume of content, and the desire to quickly assess and cite an article;
• Researchers are more likely to look for ways to find the article VOR, rather than an AM or preprint. Where authors did not have access to the VOR (i.e. via a subscription or due to it being published OA), the majority – nearly 9 in 10 – will take direct action to gain access to the VOR (such as contact the author);
• Alternative versions of the article can offer value, with caveats on use. Though VOR is preferred, many researchers feel comfortable using a preprint or an AM for reading and, in some instances, for citing. Speed of availability is noted as a benefit from preprints; and
• The article VOR is considered the most authoritative and credible source by the majority of researchers. Researcher preference for the VOR highlights the value added by publishers, in particular to the ‘stamp of credibility’ publication in a recognised journal brings.
Company of Biologists agrees OA deal with Max Planck Digital Library
The Company of Biologists has announced a three-year read and publish open access agreement with the Max Planck Digital Library. Under the cost-neutral
transformative agreement, which runs until 31 December 2023, corresponding authors at Max Planck Society’s 86 institutes benefit from immediate open access (OA) publication of their research articles in The Company of Biologists’ hybrid subscription journals – Development, Journal of Cell Science and Journal of Experimental Biology – with no author-facing
www.researchinformation.info | @researchinfo
publishing charges. In addition, the agreement enables corresponding authors at Max Planck institutes to publish research articles without charge in The Company of Biologists’ fully OA journals – Disease Models & Mechanisms and Biology Open. Unlimited access to the full journal archives is also available. ‘We are very pleased
to implement this new agreement with The Company of Biologists, and salute their willingness to test new economic models that are repurposing previous subscription fees to facilitate
a sustainable and cost-neutral transition of their journals to an Open Access publishing model,’ said Ralf Schimmer, head of information provision at the Max Planck Digital Library. ‘This agreement marks a further, significant step in the Max Planck Society’s strategy to enable open dissemination of research, in line with the principles of the OA2020 Initiative and the Berlin Declaration on Open Access.’ Richard Grove, commercial manager at The Company of Biologists, added: ‘As a not-for- profit publisher with a mission to support biologists and
inspire biology, we have been committed to OA for many years. We have worked closely with our library partners and funding organisations to develop sustainable OA publishing models and we pride ourselves on our flexibility and willingness to experiment. ‘Following fruitful
discussions with the Max Planck Society, we are pleased to pilot a read and publish agreement which has been tailored to meet the needs of a research-intensive institution with a large network of institutes.’
April/May 2021 Research Information 27
itti ratanakiranaworn/
Shutterstock.com
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
