We celebrate the tenth anniversary of our organisation with the announcement of major funding from the Arcadia Foundation in support of Notify, a project led by COAR with the contribution of Open Scholar and other important implementing partners.
We announce the relaunch of Psicológica, the journal of the Spanish Society for Experimental Psychology (SEPEX), as a Diamond Open Access journal published exclusively on DIGITAL.CSIC, the institutional repository of the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC).
COAR presents and makes available for public comment a new model for overlay peer review on repositories. This model is a significant step towards the development of a highly distributed architecture for overlay services that takes us beyond the current landscape with many silos, in which every organisation maintains its own separate system, to a decentralised, global, interoperable, scholarly infrastructure. The present work can scale, respond to different needs and priorities related to language, region, and discipline, and has the potential to liberate scholarly communication from the short-sighted interests of private groups and organisations.
By Pandelis Perakakis Originally published in //blog.euroscientist.com/open-scientists-in-the-shoes-of-frustrated-academics-part-i-open-minded-scepticism/ Last week I was in Oslo, invited by the organising committee of Eurodoc2017, to give an introductory talk on Open Science . One thing that became apparent during this two-day event was that, although irresistibly trendy, Open Science remains an elusive concept. Many continue to confuse Open Science with …
Open Scholar is a small group of researchers who share the vision of a scholarly communication system organised and maintained by the research community without the involvement of intermediaries motivated by non-scientific interests.
Last week Pandelis Perakakis attended the COAR (@COAR_eV) 2016 annual meeting hosted by the University of Vienna. I was invited by COAR’s executive director Kathleen Shearer to give a talk on peer review on top of repository networks and to participate in a working group that will discuss and provide recommendations for “Next Generation Repositories”.
Open access repositories administered by Universities or research organizations are a valuable infrastructure that could support the transition to a more collaborative and efficient scholarly evaluation and communication system. Open Scholar has coordinated a consortium of six partners to develop the first Open Peer Review Module (OPRM) for institutional repositories. The module integrates an overlay peer review service, coupled with a transparent reputation system, on top of institutional repositories.
In reforming the culture of peer review and moving towards a system that embraces the use and recognition of pre-print servers, we are cognizant of the need to avoid re-inventing the wheel, by identifying and using existing infrastructure and initiatives that can assist in furthering this goal.
Why aren’t articles on arXiv —or any other open access repository— formally credited as publications? What is it exactly that separates open access repositories from publishers? The simple answer is that publications in journals come with an amorphous quality indicator associated with the journal’s perceived prestige. Articles posted on a repository on the other hand, are considered to be “provided at the reader’s own risk”, as they are not accompanied by any measurable guarantee of their scientific merit. We think the time has come to change all that.
In this post Karen Shashok presents arguments on how pre-submission peer review can benefit scholarly communication by increasing the quality of published research and reducing retractions.