Two scholarly publishing cultures? Open access drives a divergence in European academic publishing practices

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.06282v1
• Date: Sat, 09 Nov 2024 20:54:08 GMT
• Title: Two scholarly publishing cultures? Open access drives a divergence in European academic publishing practices
• Authors: Leon Kopitar, Nejc Plohl, Mojca Tancer Verboten, Gregor Štiglic, Roger Watson, Dean Korošak,
• Abstract summary: This study empirically tests how universities and countries respond to shifts in the academic publishing landscape. New open access publishers challenge traditional publishing models, offering faster review times and broader accessibility. Our findings reveal a clear division in European publishing practices, with countries clustering into two groups distinguished by the ratio of publications in new open access journals.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The current system of scholarly publishing is often criticized for being slow, expensive, and not transparent. The rise of open access publishing as part of open science tenets, promoting transparency and collaboration, together with calls for research assesment reforms are the results of these criticisms. The emergence of new open access publishers presents a unique opportunity to empirically test how universities and countries respond to shifts in the academic publishing landscape. These new actors challenge traditional publishing models, offering faster review times and broader accessibility, which could influence strategic publishing decisions. Our findings reveal a clear division in European publishing practices, with countries clustering into two groups distinguished by the ratio of publications in new open access journals with accelerated review times versus legacy journals. This divide underscores a broader shift in academic culture, highlighting new open access publishing venues as a strategic factor influencing national and institutional publishing practices, with significant implications for research accessibility and collaboration across Europe.

Related papers

• A Literature Review of Literature Reviews in Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence [55.33653554387953]
  Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (PAMI) has led to numerous literature reviews aimed at collecting and fragmented information. This paper presents a thorough analysis of these literature reviews within the PAMI field. We try to address three core research questions: (1) What are the prevalent structural and statistical characteristics of PAMI literature reviews; (2) What strategies can researchers employ to efficiently navigate the growing corpus of reviews; and (3) What are the advantages and limitations of AI-generated reviews compared to human-authored ones.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-20T11:28:50Z)
• Position: AI/ML Influencers Have a Place in the Academic Process [82.2069685579588]
  We investigate the role of social media influencers in enhancing the visibility of machine learning research. We have compiled a comprehensive dataset of over 8,000 papers, spanning tweets from December 2018 to October 2023. Our statistical and causal inference analysis reveals a significant increase in citations for papers endorsed by these influencers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-24T20:05:49Z)
• Academic competitions [61.592427413342975]
  This chapter provides a survey of academic challenges in the context of machine learning and related fields. We review the most influential competitions in the last few years and analyze challenges per area of knowledge. The aims of scientific challenges, their goals, major achievements and expectations for the next few years are reviewed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-01T01:01:04Z)
• On the culture of open access: the Sci-hub paradox [0.0]
  Shadow libraries are online collections of copyrighted publications that have been made available for free without the permission of the copyright holders. This study shows that OA publications, including those in fully OA journals, receive more citations than their subscription-based counterparts. The introduction of a distinction between those accessible or not via the Scihub platform among subscription-based suggest that the generalization of its use cancels the positive effect of OA publishing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-30T07:50:56Z)
• The Semantic Reader Project: Augmenting Scholarly Documents through AI-Powered Interactive Reading Interfaces [54.2590226904332]
  We describe the Semantic Reader Project, a effort across multiple institutions to explore automatic creation of dynamic reading interfaces for research papers. Ten prototype interfaces have been developed and more than 300 participants and real-world users have shown improved reading experiences. We structure this paper around challenges scholars and the public face when reading research papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-25T02:47:09Z)
• How do Authors' Perceptions of their Papers Compare with Co-authors' Perceptions and Peer-review Decisions? [87.00095008723181]
  Authors have roughly a three-fold overestimate of the acceptance probability of their papers. Female authors exhibit a marginally higher (statistically significant) miscalibration than male authors. At least 30% of respondents of both accepted and rejected papers said that their perception of their own paper improved after the review process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-22T15:59:30Z)
• Digital Publishing Habits, Perceptions of Open Access Publishing and Other Access Publishing: Across Continents Survey Study [1.693200946453174]
  The research mainly focuses on the importance, need, and author preference for open access journals. As an independent researcher, developing countries and other impoverished countries, researchers can give the utmost importance to open access journals. The researcher publishing the manuscript is more important than the quality of the content also important in scholarly publication.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-14T10:19:55Z)
• Which Factors are associated with Open Access Publishing? A Springer Nature Case Study [6.7076682695289485]
  We studied 522,411 articles published by Springer Nature. Authors eligible for APC waivers publish more in gold-OA journals than others. Authors eligible for an APC discount have the lowest ratio of OA publications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-17T11:06:44Z)
• Revise and Resubmit: An Intertextual Model of Text-based Collaboration in Peer Review [52.359007622096684]
  Peer review is a key component of the publishing process in most fields of science. Existing NLP studies focus on the analysis of individual texts. editorial assistance often requires modeling interactions between pairs of texts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-22T16:39:38Z)
• Nanopublication-Based Semantic Publishing and Reviewing: A Field Study with Formalization Papers [0.5735035463793008]
  We use the concept and technology of nanopublications for this endeavor. We represent not just the submissions and final papers in this RDF-based format,but also the whole process in between. We received 15 submissions from 18 authors,who then went through the whole publication process leading to the publication of their contributions in the special issue.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-03T10:04:10Z)
• What's New? Summarizing Contributions in Scientific Literature [85.95906677964815]
  We introduce a new task of disentangled paper summarization, which seeks to generate separate summaries for the paper contributions and the context of the work. We extend the S2ORC corpus of academic articles by adding disentangled "contribution" and "context" reference labels. We propose a comprehensive automatic evaluation protocol which reports the relevance, novelty, and disentanglement of generated outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-06T02:23:01Z)
• Evolving Methods for Evaluating and Disseminating Computing Research [4.0318506932466445]
  Social and technical trends have significantly changed methods for evaluating and disseminating computing research. Traditional venues for reviewing and publishing, such as conferences and journals, worked effectively in the past. Many conferences have seen large increases in the number of submissions. Dis dissemination of research ideas has become dramatically through publication venues such as arXiv.org and social media networks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-02T16:50:28Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.