This is the "oa.new" feed published by the OATP hub. It's a remix feed so that, over time, I can modify it without modifying the URL. For example, I  can filter out spam or make other modifications later on without changing the URL. https://tagteam.harvard.edu/hubs/oatp/republished_feeds/6 TagTeam social RSS aggregrator "Welcome to the 2026 SPARC Europe survey on Open Education (OE). Why take it?   We use your responses to shape future support and policy for Open Education for Europe. Your input is valuable whether your institution is already active or just exploring OE." Thu, 04 Jun 2026 05:43:00 -0400 https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/29W993M oa.new oa.education oa.europe oa.universities oa.sparc_europe oa.surveys oa.oer "The simplest way to learn about predatory journals and their tricks of the trade is to look at the burgeoning number of articles on the topic. Since 2020, there have been over 2,000 research articles published that mention ‘predatory publishing,’ with the rate increasing over time. Indeed, as you can see from the graph below, aside from the spike in 2021 and a fall back in 2022 following the pandemic, we have seen year-on-year increases so that 2025 was the biggest ever year for published research on the topic. ... While we are only five complete months into the new year, there have already been over 200 articles on the topic, so perhaps now is a good time to turn the spotlight on some recent articles that represent the latest research in the area. ... The final article worth highlighting is by C Vysakh and titled ‘Predatory journals and their societal impact: a case study based on Beall’s list and altmetric.com.’ While the article itself is moderately interesting – offering insights into how little predatory journals are actually covered in social media – it also typifies the reliance on Beall’s List for predatory journal identification. This use of Beall’s List as a source of data is not only unacademic given the well-known problems with the lists, but also hugely outdated as it is now over nine years since Beall shuttered his website. Using academic research to improve one’s knowledge about predatory publishing practices is a wise move, but it also needs to be aligned with a critical approach when it comes to source materials." Thu, 04 Jun 2026 05:36:00 -0400 https://blog.cabells.com/2026/06/03/reviewing-the-literature-on-predatory-publishing/ oa.new oa.journals oa.predatory oa.credibility oa.quality Reimagining Openness in Academic Libraries Online on 24th June 2026 and in person on 6th July 2026 at the Dalton Building, Manchester Metropolitan University.   Many thanks to all those who have submitted a proposal for our #ALN26 programme. The draft programme is now available, highlighting our speakers and titles of papers along with abstracts. Both the online and in person conference programme are available in this one document. Thu, 04 Jun 2026 02:11:00 -0400 https://academiclibrariesnorth.ac.uk/conference/aln-conference-2026/ oa.new oa.events oa.libraries oa.europe oa.uk "University rankings are shaping institutional strategy more than ever – but how well do they actually measure what matters? And what happens when Open Access becomes a performance indicator? This interactive online workshop brings together professionals from German and Dutch universities to critically examine how rankings are constructed, how they are used in institutional decision-making, and how institutions can respond more strategically. The workshop is primarily aimed at university management, research and ranking managers, library management staff, Open Access/Open Science officers, bibliometricians, and anyone working at the intersection of research evaluation, rankings and Open Access strategies."   Date: 26.06.2026 Time: 10:00–12:30 CEST Location: Online via Zoom Language: English Registration: https://uni-goettingen.zoom-x.de/meeting/register/V5l2ogCjSu-rzvk5E98U3w Thu, 04 Jun 2026 00:28:00 -0400 https://oa-datenpraxis.de/en/events/webinar_20260626.html oa.events oa.universities oa.policies oa.policies.universities oa.incentives oa.assessment oa.strategies oa.new oa.rankings "The Open Courts Act would require the federal judiciary to overhaul PACER, the online repository of court records, and make the service free to access." Wed, 03 Jun 2026 10:48:00 -0400 https://courthousenews.com/free-pacer-senators-take-another-stab-at-revamping-access-to-federal-court-records/ oa.new oa.usa oa.legislation oa.law oa.pacer Abstract:  Librarians, with their core values of access, intellectual freedom, stewardship and democracy, share bibliodiversity advocates’ vision of an eco-social system of diverse cultures and reading as a democratic and emancipatory practice. Librarians bolster bibliodiversity by collecting inclusively, critically reviewing and decolonizing library collections, and centering access. Building on previous discussions on the role of open access in strengthening bibliodiversity, this paper acknowledges and articulates how interlibrary loan and library resource sharing also support bibliodiversity. Doing so is important to augment advocacy and support for these services. Advancing solutions to challenges in resource sharing means also advancing towards bibliodiversity goals, supporting access to more information for more people.   Wed, 03 Jun 2026 10:45:00 -0400 https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_pubs/1150/ oa.new oa.bibliodiversity oa.libraries oa.ill "The University of Nottingham has chosen not to renew five publishing deals this year as the research-intensive institution struggles under severe financial pressure." Wed, 03 Jun 2026 10:44:00 -0400 https://www.researchprofessionalnews.com/rr-news-uk-universities-2026-5-university-of-nottingham-drops-five-publishing-deals/ oa.new oa.u.nottingham oa.cancellations oa.big_deals oa.paywalled oa.libraries oa.budgets oa.prices oa.uk "Still, some observers fault GAO for assuming the author-pays publishing model would predominate over others that might not cost agencies so much, such as encouraging authors to deposit articles in public repositories or supporting journals that make articles free to read without charging fees or subscriptions. “It is not the federal government’s responsibility to prop up a particular business model,” says Christopher Steven Marcum, a consultant who as a White House official during the Biden administration helped write the Nelson Memo. (That memo did not endorse a particular business model.) “The report seems to say, publishers control all the power, so federal agencies just have to cough up more money for them. I’m a little bit mystified by that.” " Wed, 03 Jun 2026 10:30:00 -0400 https://www.science.org/content/article/u-s-agencies-aren-t-ready-rising-cost-making-research-papers-free-report-warns oa.new oa.gao oa.usa oa.fees oa.business_models oa.economics_of oa.funders oa.policies oa.policies.funders oa.ostp oa.misunderstandings oa.funders "The European Rights Retention Community of Practice (CoP) continues to bring together experts and practitioners from across Europe to exchange experiences, learn from one another, and advance rights retention strategies. At this 10th meeting, we are pleased to welcome Ana Lazarova (Digital Republic, Bulgaria), Lionel Maurel (CNRS Sciences humaines & sociales, France) and Sam Moore (University of Cambridge, UK), who will share their perspectives on how open science and rights retention support academic freedom. Beyond the presentations, this meeting offers a space for community members to actively participate by sharing experiences, discussing challenges, and exploring practical solutions together.   If you work at an academic institution, are a funder, or an Open Science policymaker, please join us and contribute to the conversation." Wed, 03 Jun 2026 10:02:00 -0400 https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/Fc4DnzrISqu6pz9he8Xgrw oa.new oa.events oa.copyright oa.rights-retention oa.sparc_europe "We are delighted to announce that one of our member and two of our associate member presses are represented in the 2026 American Council of Learned Societies (ACLS) Open Access Book Prize and Arcadia Open Access Publishing Awards shortlist. In total, books from OIPA members and associate members account for around 23% of the shortlisted titles. They are represented across five of the six categories, with two presses having more than one title on the list." Wed, 03 Jun 2026 09:54:00 -0400 https://oipauk.org/2026/06/02/oipa-members-recognised-in-2026-acls-open-access-book-prize-shortlist/ oa.new oa.awards oa.acls oa.books oa.oipa "Frustrated by the slow growth of OA and the realization that even OA will not achieve 100 percent access, various groups and individuals worldwide have built a series of digital infrastructures, called shadow libraries, that circumvent publisher paywalls. Shadow is an apt term here. In Star’s definition, we recall, one of the crucial features of infrastructure is that, when they are working, they are invisible. The emergence of their “shadows” implies that these infrastructures, with all their flaws, are no longer invisible; they now occlude the light. The most well known and significant of these libraries are Sci-Hub, Library Genesis, Anna’s Archive, and Memory of the World, each hosting substantial volumes of material.1 In addition, UbuWeb, which explicitly describes itself as a “pirate shadow library,” hosts hundreds of thousands of specifically avant-garde digital artifacts. Other shadow libraries include Monoskop (“an independent web-based educational resource and research platform for arts, culture and humanities founded in 2004”) and Aaaaarg (originally AAARG, an acronym of Artists, Architects, and Activists Reading Group), both of which bill themselves specifically in educational terms." Wed, 03 Jun 2026 09:25:00 -0400 https://dhdebates.gc.cuny.edu/read/critical-infrastructure-studies-and-digital-humanities/section/f4451084-a3bd-4a36-860d-f3a14e17ad0c oa.new oa.guerrilla oa.infrastructure oa.copyright "Each year, Openjournals brings together members of its journal editorial boards for a dedicated Users’ Day. This year, the event is open for everyone in the Diamond Open Access scholarly community! During the day, participants can meet and discuss various aspects of publishing a Diamond Open Access journal. This year’s event will take place on Wednesday, June 3, at the beautiful Trippenhuis in Amsterdam. Participants will share experiences, practical insights, and challenges, with ample time for open discussion. The Network and Users’ Day is designed as a collaborative and engaging space for editorial teams and the broader DOA community to connect, exchange knowledge, and learn from one another. Previous editions have been both valuable and enjoyable, and we look forward to welcoming many of you for another inspiring day." Wed, 03 Jun 2026 09:15:00 -0400 https://openjournals.nl/en/network-and-users-day-2026/ oa.new oa.events oa.netherlands oa.openjournals "The share of publications available as open access rose to 66.5% in 2024 from 41.4% in 2010." Wed, 03 Jun 2026 09:11:00 -0400 https://www.brusselstimes.com/eu-affairs/2168226/eu-research-boosts-open-access-but-scientific-impact-declines-over-13-years oa.new oa.growth oa.europe oa.impact oa.negative oa.monitoring "Keynote by Leslie Chan, Department of Global Development Studies, Director of the Knowledge Equity Lab, University of Toronto. DORA Steering Committee, Past Board Member of DOAJ and IOI.  Leslie Chan’s keynote below, delivered at the 14th Global Research Council (GRC) Annual Meeting on May 20, 2026, in Bangkok, Thailand, underscored a critical shift in how we understand the relationship between Open Science and research assessment: openness alone is not enough unless incentives, evaluation practices, and governance are aligned with principles of equity, justice, and stewardship. Chan argued that Open Science must move beyond access to embrace an interconnected knowledge ecology in which who produces knowledge, who governs it, whose knowledge traditions are recognized, and who benefits from openness are central concerns. This includes meaningful engagement with Indigenous knowledge, local and community-based knowledge, and diverse epistemic traditions on their own terms. The keynote directly links Open Science to research assessment reform, since current metrics and reward systems often privilege dominant outputs, languages, institutions, and narrow definitions of excellence. To realize the full potential of Open Science, funders and institutions must contextualize excellence by embedding equity, multilingualism, stewardship, Indigenous data sovereignty, societal engagement, and diverse knowledge outputs into evaluation criteria.In this way, more equitable and plural approaches to research assessment become key enablers of Open Science, ensuring that openness advances not only visibility and efficiency, but also fairness, inclusion, and global knowledge equity. The keynote is based on the discussion paper intended to foster dialogue and exchange among GRC participating organizations in 2025–2026." Wed, 03 Jun 2026 06:42:00 -0400 https://sfdora.org/2026/05/25/reimagining-open-science/ oa.new oa.events oa.dei oa.open_science oa.sustainability oa.indigenous oa.assessment "The major underlying flaw of article to article citations is that they are not ‘trust dense’: they require almost no effort from authors to include, and there are negligible consequences for citing a weak article. Find a relevant paper, add it into your reference manager, and in a few clicks the article to article citation is created. If a cited article is later found to be flawed, then nothing happens – the article to article citation persists and opinion around the citing article is usually unaffected. The good news is that there are other forms of citation that are much more ‘trust dense’. As presaged by the title, the most ‘trust dense’ citation is a data citation*. Or, more fully, an ‘article to dataset to article’ citation. This specific kind of citation arises when an article generates new data and a subsequent article bases new analyses on that dataset. NB I’m using ‘citation’ quite broadly here – the reanalysis implies a connection between the subsequent article and the earlier article/dataset, even when a formal citation for the reanalyzed data does not appear in the subsequent paper.  First, for a data citation to happen, the original article must have somehow made their newly generated data available, which by itself is a powerful signal that the original authors were sufficiently confident in their findings to give others access to the underlying evidence. Data sharing is rare among articles from paper mills, and (perhaps obviously) only articles that share their data can be judged ‘reproducible’, which is perhaps the highest badge of analytic robustness." Wed, 03 Jun 2026 05:16:00 -0400 https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2026/06/02/data-reuse-is-the-sincerest-form-of-flattery/ oa.new oa.data oa.reuse oa.citations oa.data.citation oa.trust "Over the last thirteen years, bioRxiv and medRxiv have grown into widely used infrastructure for rapid research sharing in biology and medicine. The reliability and researcher-first values that have defined these platforms since their founding remain central to how we operate, and building on the trust, partnerships, and community relationships researchers worldwide depend on is core to our mission. At the same time, the research ecosystem is evolving rapidly — driven by changes in technology, policy, and the global landscape — and we think this is a genuinely exciting and critical moment to explore how preprinting can continue to evolve. Today, we're thrilled to announce the launch of openRxiv Labs, a structured program for testing new and ambitious approaches to research communication. Growing directly from the strong foundation bioRxiv and medRxiv have built over the past decade, Labs is an experimental space for pushing the boundaries of research communication on top of openRxiv's corpus of preprints, figures, metadata, and other research outputs. The goal is to experiment with what improvements in preprinting might look like in practice, while retaining the stability of our core platforms." Tue, 02 Jun 2026 11:20:00 -0400 https://connect.biorxiv.org/news/2026/06/01/launching_openrxiv_labs oa.new oa.openrxiv oa.biorxiv oa.medrxiv oa.preprints oa.repositories oa.repositories.preprints oa.infrastructure oa.scholcomm oa.platforms oa.versions Abstract:  The four largest companies in scholarly publishing and research data analytics—RELX, Springer Nature Group, Wiley, and Clarivate—reported strong financial performance between October 2024 and March 2026. Across nearly every measure, revenue grew, margins expanded, and cash flow increased. Yet share prices for all four fell significantly over the same period. When investors pay less per dollar of earnings despite improving results, it generally signals doubt about long-term prospects. SPARC’s analysis indicates that AI is the primary driver of the share price declines each company has seen over the past 18 months, despite strong underlying financial performance. In contrast to the external AI infrastructure providers they now rely on, these companies have kept their capital expenditures flat or reduced them, instead returning capital to shareholders through stock buybacks and dividends. Market analysts expect these companies will face risks related to their reliance on AI providers and the cost pressure that could create. Tue, 02 Jun 2026 10:08:00 -0400 https://zenodo.org/records/20497757 oa.new oa.sparc oa.publishers oa.economics_of oa.ai An event announcement with no further information. Tue, 02 Jun 2026 08:38:00 -0400 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/force2026/Programme/agenda/12/ oa.new oa.events oa.monitoring oa.asia oa.open_science oa.singapore Abstract:  Preprints, scientific manuscripts publicly shared prior to peer-review, are now part of scholarly 25 communication as emerging information resources. While neuroscience researchers have increasingly 26 published preprints, the impact of preprints in this field remains unclear. Through a bibliometric 27 approach, this case study explored preprint citation patterns. Results yielded over 33,000 citations to 28 preprints within Scopus-indexed neuroscience documents (1993-2022). Trends of citations and 29 citation motivations were investigated. Findings indicated that 1.62% of neuroscience publications 30 cited at least one preprint, with citations peaking at 6% in 2021. Review and journal articles cited 31 preprints more frequently, compared to books, notes, and conference papers (X² = 1909.015, p < 32 0.001). The most commonly cited servers were bioRxiv, arXiv, medRxiv, and PsyArXiv. Regarding 33 journals, a moderate positive correlation (rs = 0.353, p < 0.01) was found between publications citing 34 preprints and journals’ CiteScores. Using Scite.ai, 93% of citations were classified as ‘mentioning,’ 35 with considerably fewer being supporting or contrasting. Most preprint citations appeared in 36 Introduction and Discussion, highlighting their role in framing research questions and contextualizing 37 results. The global overview of these results may help contextualize citation behavior in relation to 38 structural and cultural factors, such as disciplinary norms, policy frameworks, researchers' attitudes, 39 and health emergencies. Tue, 02 Jun 2026 08:27:00 -0400 https://direct.mit.edu/qss/article/doi/10.1162/QSS.a.490/136920 oa.new oa.preprints oa.scholcomm oa.neuro oa.citations oa.medicine oa.versions Wiley has acquired Emerald Publishing from Cambridge Information Group (CIG) in deal valued at £337 million (USD $452 million), expanding its journal portfolio to approximately 2,500 titles and significantly strengthening its position in the social sciences. The acquisition adds nearly 500 journal brands, 8,000 book titles, and a substantial archive of case studies and backfile content to Wiley’s portfolio. The move is expected to bolster Wiley’s presence across disciplines including economics, business, finance, accounting, management, strategy, education, engineering, information and knowledge management, operations, public policy and environmental management. Wiley said the acquisition not only increases its scale in research publishing but also strengthens its proprietary content assets at a time when demand for trusted scholarly content is growing rapidly amid the expansion of AI-powered tools and applications. “Emerald represents an outstanding strategic fit for Wiley – a complementary portfolio, a compatible culture, and decades of specialised content that will meaningfully expand our scale and portfolio depth in both research publishing and research intelligence,” said Matthew Kissner, Wiley President and CEO. “This transaction reflects our conviction that research and AI are mutually reinforcing: our proprietary content and data fuels AI, and AI accelerates the pace of publishing. Emerald materially strengthens both – expanding our peer-reviewed content base and adding a high-margin, recurring revenue stream that we expect to drive meaningful shareholder value.” Founded in 1967 and headquartered in the UK, Emerald has built a strong reputation in scholarly publishing, particularly in business and management research, with a focus on connecting academic research with practical application. Commenting on the acquisition, Vicky Williams, CEO of Emerald, said: “Wiley is the ideal home for Emerald and the global communities we serve. For almost 60 years, we have been dedicated to publishing the highest-quality peer-reviewed research that bridges the gap between academic discovery and practical application, as well as developing an internal and external-facing culture that promotes inclusion and belonging. Joining Wiley gives us the best-in-class platform, an extended global footprint, and further reach into academic and corporate markets to drive real-world impact, which aligns with our founding mission. We are excited to join Wiley and build on their exceptional foundation for growth, innovation, and integrity.” Cambridge Information Group CEO Andy Snyder said the transaction marks the next stage in Emerald’s development. “Emerald has built an exceptional reputation in academic publishing through its commitment to quality, innovation, and global impact. We are incredibly proud of the business the Emerald team has built and the value created over the years,” said Snyder. “Wiley is the ideal partner for Emerald’s next chapter, with the scale, capabilities, and strategic vision to further expand its reach and influence across the global research community.”   Tue, 02 Jun 2026 08:21:00 -0400 https://www.researchinformation.info/news/wiley-acquires-emerald-publishing-in-337m-deal/ oa.new oa.books oa.journals oa.publishers oa.wiley oa.emerald oa.ssh oa.monopoly A conference registration form with no further information. Tue, 02 Jun 2026 06:13:00 -0400 https://us06web.zoom.us/meeting/register/58a1kiCHSgyO3-SIvypN3g oa.new oa.events oa.recommendations oa.advocacy Abstract:  Meta-research has investigated various concerns around ‘research culture’ in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). Despite sector-wide efforts to improve institutional cultures, evidence suggests that such initiatives are seldom evaluated. This study explored how meta-research informs decisions affecting research culture within English HEIs, along with the mechanisms which enable or hinder meta-research from impacting decisions. Interviews were conducted with 14 institution-level ‘decision-makers’ from 11 diverse English HEIs, plus 7 meta-researchers in the UK. Data were analysed using deductive content analysis. Participants discussed how research has greatly informed HEI strategic directions to improve research culture. This primarily happened indirectly, brought into decisions by advocates and extrinsic forces. Some institutions have also conducted local research into their own cultures. Nevertheless, innovations to improve research culture are less evidence-based and infrequently evaluated. Participants identified several mechanisms by which meta-research could impact on such decisions. Engagement, consultation, and co-creation could make meta-research more impactful, whereas career stage, prestige, and personal connections could either enable or hinder researchers from achieving impact. Generating sufficiently persuasive evidence to inform impactful decisions was an additional barrier to meta-research impact. Lastly, findings which reflected poorly on institutions or individuals could reduce uptake or sharing of results. This research highlights the need to more rigorously evaluate the impact of research culture reforms. Given the scale of institutional changes, the research encourages sector-wide collaboration and sharing of findings, suggesting ways in which researchers and institutions can seek to maximise the impact of meta-research on research culture. Tue, 02 Jun 2026 06:11:00 -0400 https://zenodo.org/records/20488064 oa.new oa.culture oa.universities oa.meteor oa.metaresearch "The Library Publishing Coalition is excited to announce the release of a new AI Editorial Policy Guide. This document is designed to help editors and those involved in publishing to develop an AI policy for your publishing program. Sections include policy development and maintenance, the fundamental elements included in an AI editorial policy guide, an annotated list of selected examples of AI policies, as well as further resources to aid your policy development. This policy was developed by the LPC Professional Development Committee as a follow up to an LPC-hosted webinar on AI Policies which included guest speakers from Ubiquity Press (Imogen Clarke) and In the Library with the Lead Pipe (Ryan Randall and Brittany Paloma Fiedler). We encourage you to watch the webinar recording as you think about your AI policy planning. This document is being released under a Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY), so we encourage further distribution and adaptation of this guide." Tue, 02 Jun 2026 05:29:00 -0400 https://librarypublishing.org/lpc-releases-new-ai-editorial-policy-guide/ oa.new oa.lpc oa.libraries oa.ai oa.publishing "On 29 May 2026, the LIBER Educational Resources Working Group hosted the fourth session of the AI Pulse webinar series. Read more about the series: https://libereurope.eu/article/liber-... Moderator: Tamara Pianos (Head of Information Provision and Access, ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, LIBER Educational Resources WG) Speakers: Jörg Pareigis (Assistant Professor of Business Administration at Karlstad Business School, LIBER Educational Resources WG)  Paola Corti (Senior Open Education Expert at SPARC Europe, LIBER Educational Resources WG)." Tue, 02 Jun 2026 05:17:00 -0400 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ajn3kjNV1s oa.new oa.events oa.video oa.ai oa.oer oaliber The National Library of Sweden (Kungliga biblioteket, KB) compiles Swedish higher education institutions’ expenditures for scholarly publishing – that is, costs for subscriptions, publishing research articles, and purchasing scholarly literature. For 2025, these costs amounted to SEK 819 million, an increase of just approximately 1,6 per cent from the previous year. Tue, 02 Jun 2026 04:48:00 -0400 https://www.kb.se/for-bibliotekssektorn/eng/news-from-the-national-library/news/2026-06-01-costs-of-scolarly-publishing-2025.html oa.new oa.sweden oa.europe oa.publishing oa.costs oa.economics_of oa.offsets oa.prices Differences between the impacts of Open Access (OA) and non-OA research have been observed over a range of citation and altmetric indicators, usually finding an Open Access Advantage (OAA). However, science-wide analyses covering multiple years, indicators, and disciplines are lacking. Using citations and six altmetrics for 33.3 million articles published during 2011–2021, we compare OA and non-OA papers. The results show that there is no universal OAA across all disciplines or impact indicators: The OAA for citations tends to be lower for recent papers, whereas the OAAs for news, blogs, and Twitter are consistent across years and unrelated to volume of OA publications. Wikipedia OAAs are consistently pronounced for all subjects except Humanities and Social Sciences. Patent OAAs for are strongest for Medical & Health Sciences and Life Sciences. Uniquely, the OAAs for Policy citations are stronger for recently published research. These results support different hypotheses for different subjects and indicators. The evidence is consistent with OA accelerating research impact in Medical & Health Sciences, Life Sciences, and Humanities; increased visibility/discoverability being a factor in promoting the socio-economic impact; and that OA is a factor in growing online engagement with research. OAAs are therefore complex, dynamic and multi-factorial, and require considerable analysis to understand. Tue, 02 Jun 2026 01:55:00 -0400 https://direct.mit.edu/qss/article/doi/10.1162/QSS.a.470/135815/Evaluating-open-access-advantages-for-citations?searchresult=1 oa.new oa.citations oa.altmetrics oa.impact oa.journals Join us for the RINN (Research Intelligence Network Netherlands) & SURF ORI (Open Research Information) Community Summer Event 2026. This one-day symposium brings together professionals working in research intelligence, libraries, policy, data science, analytics, governance, and research administration across knowledge institutions. Tue, 02 Jun 2026 01:25:00 -0400 https://www.eur.nl/en/events/rinn-ori-summer-event-2026-are-we-ready-open-yet-2026-06-23 oa.new oa.events oa.policies oa.netherlands oa.europe oa.data oa.assessment oa.compliance The citations to open access preprint and working paper versions of papers that are also formally published in journals are not regularly counted in global multidisciplinary proprietary citation index databases, nor are they considered in most bibliometric studies. They are, however, integrated into paper citation counts in other citation databases. It can be argued that open access preprint citations reflect a relevant part of scientific impact of a work as proxied by citation counts, particularly in scientific disciplines that make extensive use of preprints/working papers for rapid open communication. Here we present a large-scale study of these usually uncounted open access preprint citations for the Web of Science database to provide an exploratory overview of the magnitude of this phenomenon and its distribution across disciplines. To this end, we introduce a methodology to link cited reference strings referring to preprints/working papers to their matching published journal versions. We find that at least 390,000 WoS-indexed publications have 1.1 million preprint version citations which are not included in ordinary citation counts. Tue, 02 Jun 2026 01:16:00 -0400 https://jlis.lis.ntu.edu.tw/html/j62-1.html oa.new oa.preprints oa.citations oa.open_peer_review oa.impact oa.journals oa.versions PLOS journals allow authors of accepted articles to choose whether the peer review will be openly published alongside the article. This creates an observational study to examine the characteristics of authors and articles that more often choose open peer review, and whether open review is associated with measures of article quality. We examined over 115,000 PLOS articles and estimated what characteristics of the articles were associated with open peer review. We also examined if open peer review was associated with the subsequent retraction of the article and the number of citations. Forty percent of articles chose open peer review. Authors from the UK, France, the Netherlands, and Ethiopia were more likely to choose open peer review. In contrast, authors from Saudi Arabia, the Republic of Korea, Pakistan, Poland, and China were less likely to choose open review. Authors with an edu email were less likely to choose open review, whilst authors with a gmail were more likely. Articles with open peer review were less likely to be retracted (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.75, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.93) and had more citations on average (adjusted rate ratio = 1.07, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.09). In this exploratory study, we found clear differences in participation in open reviews with strong differences between countries. Authors who have confidence in their article and who engage in other open science practices may be more likely to chose open peer review, making this choice an indicator of article quality. Mon, 01 Jun 2026 23:53:00 -0400 https://osf.io/preprints/metaarxiv/2b7z5_v1?hss_channel=lcp-28660 oa.new oa.preprints oa.quality oa.retractions oa.open_peer_review oa.versions Universities of Applied Sciences (UASs) of the Netherlands, like many publicly funded institutions, wish to make their impact on society visible. Policy of the Netherlands Association of Universities of Applied Sciences (NAUAS) indicates that the NAUAS wish to make impact in specific themes. This article explores the overarching question of how the evaluation of the research impact of UAS research can be conducted within the themes of the NAUAS, in a meaningful way. To do so, this article will closely examine and explore how Dutch UAS researchers view their work within the initial 10 themes, the impact they wish to create in those themes, and the output created during this process using data gathered from a national questionnaire and focus groups. We will reflect on these results against the backdrop of the specific UAS policy aims around impacts, doorwerking (effect or influence), and the broader impact literature. Mon, 01 Jun 2026 11:09:00 -0400 https://academic.oup.com/rev/article/doi/10.1093/reseval/rvaf056/8426276 oa.new oa.netherlands oa.europe oa.policies oa.impact oa.monitoring oa.publishing Russian article with this English-language abstract:  The article discusses one of the forms of storing and making publicly available the source research data in the repository of the scientific library. Research data is used to obtain scientific knowledge is constantly accumulating and becomes material for further study, interpretation, as well as synthesis of the results of various studies and comparison or combination with other sets of comparable data, etc. The purpose of the article was to describe an information repository system that provides open access to the source data obtained during research, for their promotion in the scientific information space and to increase the visibility of research results. An analysis of publications on the topic «Repository of research data» was carried out, which showed that the range of problems considered by specialists is quite wide: from theoretical understanding of various aspects of studying repositories to describing practical experience. In general, publications on the topic have a high level of generalization and theorization of practical experience, which indicates a good level of elaboration of the problem. Special attention is paid to the Russian experience in creating and maintaining research data repositories. A small number of Russian repositories registered in the registry re3data.org. This suggests that it is a fairly new phenomenon for the country. The creation of a repository of original research data in State Public Scientific and Technical Library of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences (SPSTL SB RAS) is one example of the movement towards the openness of datasets. Such a repository will allow you to place, store and provide access to large source data arrays, which is important for obtaining grants, as well as verification of the findings by specialists, experts and reviewers. Mon, 01 Jun 2026 10:25:00 -0400 https://www.einfolib.uz/post/creation-of-a-repository-of-original-research-data-in-a-scientific-library oa.new oa.repositories oa.ir oa.case oa.case.repositories oa.libraries oa.data oa.repositories.data oa.russia oa.russian Abstract:  The forestry research data produced by the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) consists of long-term observational data that is difficult to replicate. Therefore, if not managed with an appropriate digital preservation strategy, this data is at risk of being lost or becoming inaccessible. This study aims to examine the digital preservation strategy for research data through the Dataverse repository implemented by CIFOR. The research method used is a qualitative approach with a case study design. Data collection techniques include observation, interviews, documentation, and literature review. The results of this study indicate that CIFOR implements three of the six digital preservation strategies outlined by Deegan and Tanner (2006): software and hardware maintenance, refresh and backup, and migration. Technology maintenance is conducted selectively through evaluation prior to updating the Dataverse version. Refresh and backup activities enforce strict policies regarding preservation-friendly file formats, daily backups on the frontend server, and a disaster recovery strategy integrated with cloud servers and the headquarters in Nairobi. Meanwhile, migration is carried out from local (on-premise) servers to cloud-based services using containerization technology with Docker. As for the other three strategies emulation, digital archaeology, and conversion to analog formats, they were not implemented due to strict preventive policies in place from the very beginning of data deposit. The challenges faced by CIFOR include limited storage capacity due to the accumulation of log files, researchers’ perception that Dataverse procedures are too rigid, and limited human resources in the field of research data curation.   Mon, 01 Jun 2026 10:23:00 -0400 https://jurnal.uinsu.ac.id/index.php/iqra/article/view/29000 oa.new oa.forestry oa.biology oa.data oa.preservation oa.dataverse oa.case oa.case.repositories oa.green Abstract:  Purpose Traditional peer review systems face growing criticism for their inefficiency and bias, prompting the exploration of innovative alternatives such as online crowdsourcing-based peer review models. This study aimed to investigate the effects of crowd peer review—specifically, open and closed variants—on both academic impact and social media impact, addressing the need for empirical evidence on these emerging digital practices in scholarly communication. Design/methodology/approach Articles published by Synlett that implemented closed crowd peer review (n = 917) and articles published by Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP) that implemented open crowd peer review (n = 12,827) were selected as samples. Causal inference was used to examine the data. Alternative outcome variables and different datasets were used to check the robustness of the results. Findings The results revealed that open crowd peer review significantly enhanced both academic impact and social media impact, whereas closed crowd peer review had no significant effect on either metric. These findings suggest that openness and transparency mechanisms are necessary rather than optional features of an effective crowdsourcing-based peer review system. Originality/value This study provides novel empirical evidence on the quantifiable benefits of open crowd peer review, advancing the understanding of digital crowdsourcing mechanisms in academic communication. By highlighting the differential impacts of open and closed models, the results offer actionable insights for publishers and platforms seeking to innovate peer review processes in alignment with digital transformation and online community engagement. Mon, 01 Jun 2026 09:50:00 -0400 https://www.emerald.com/oir/article-abstract/50/3/524/1342404/Crowdsourcing-in-peer-review-estimating-the oa.new oa.crowd oa.peer_review oa.open_peer_review oa.impact oa.social_media "This pulse check poll explores how social media is being used across the scholarly communications ecosystem and how its role is evolving in practice. As platforms diversify and expectations around visibility, engagement, and public communication continue to shift, organizations are making ongoing decisions about where to invest time and resources, what outcomes matter most, and how to assess value. This poll seeks to better understand which channels are in use, the goals they support, how effectiveness is perceived, and how success is measured. It also examines broader perspectives on social media’s impact on scholarly communication. Findings will help inform a more grounded, community-wide understanding of how social media is shaping the current and future landscape." Mon, 01 Jun 2026 09:41:00 -0400 https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/pulsecheck_SocialMedia oa.new oa.surveys oa.social_media oa.scholcomm Article in Spanish with this English-language abstract:  Open science represents a novel material and symbolic space in scientific research that promotes accessibility, transparency, and collaboration in every phase of the scientific process of knowledge production and dissemination. This model attempts to eliminate traditional barriers that restrict access to scientific knowledge, promoting instead the free and open social circulation of reliable information and research findings in general. Given this reality, the objective of the research is to analyze, from a political  epistemology perspective, the main discourses, tensions, and practices associated with open science. Methodologically, this is a hermeneutic and documentary research project. It concludes that the opening of science itself to transformative dialogue with the living knowledge of the community that still resists on the margins of the logocentric thinking of Western modernity makes it clear that the right to know and deliberate on reality and its constituent problems is, in truth, a collective horizon that integrates knowledge and being on equal terms in the social construction of knowledge. Mon, 01 Jun 2026 09:38:00 -0400 https://ve.scielo.org/pdf/telos/v28n1/2343-5763-telos-28-01-188.pdf oa.new oa.open_science oa.spanish oa.epistemology This manuscript deepens the concept of Stockholm Science as an analytical framework for understanding the naturalization of editorial and evaluative domination in the contemporary scientific system. Building on Robert K. Merton’s Matthew effect and Pierre Bourdieu’s concept of scientific capital, it argues that scientific inequalities are reproduced not only through structural mechanisms but also through symbolic processes of internalization and legitimation by peripheral agents. The analysis centers on the APC-based open-access publishing model and its articulation with productivism evaluation systems, showing how the capacity to publish increasingly depends on financial resources and restricted editorial circuits. The manuscript further examines publishing agreements in which the state assumes responsibility for APC payments, interpreting this shift as the institutionalization of Stockholm Science, whereby scientific dependence becomes state based. Such policies may relieve individual researchers but ultimately reinforce market logics and persistent inequalities across regional, institutional, and epistemic dimensions. Mon, 01 Jun 2026 08:15:00 -0400 https://academic.oup.com/spp/advance-article/doi/10.1093/scipol/scag040/8666226?searchresult=1 oa.new oa.paywalled oa.offsets oa.business_models oa.monopoly oa.negative oa.dei The Circé Network's Journals Hub has entrusted a research team with the production of a detailed report on new practices for evaluating scientific articles. It draws on existing scientific literature and reports on the results of a survey conducted among scholarly journals in Canada and Quebec. This survey made it possible to learn about the practices in force in the Canadian and Quebec scholarly publishing ecosystem and to gather perceptions related to evaluation practices and their potential openness.  Mon, 01 Jun 2026 07:26:00 -0400 https://reseaucirce.org/en/nouvelles/vers-une-evaluation-ouverte-repenser-levaluation-par-les-pairs-en-contexte-de-science-ouverte/ oa.new oa.canada oa.open_peer_review oa.preprints oa.peer_review oa.journals oa.surveys oa.versions "This webinar explores the work of three organisations working to support Diamond open access book publishing: Open Book Collective (OBC), the Open Journals Collective (OJC), and Thoth Open Metadata (Thoth). These organisations work with publishers on a global scale, and this includes in Germany. For example, OBC’s members include meson press, Verfassungblog, and Verlag Barbara Budrich. OJC supports German-language journals, including Zeitschrift für Fantastikforschung. Thoth hosts metadata from OBC publishers alongside many others, including Mohr Siebeck Universitätsverlag Kiel, and Universitätsverlag Potsdam. " Mon, 01 Jun 2026 05:57:00 -0400 https://open-access.network/en/fortbilden/open-access-talk/oatalk-am-11-juni-2026 oa.new oa.ojc oa.journals oa.thoth oa.collaboration oa.no-fee oa.books oa.open_book_collective oa.events "I want to get into something that's been on my mind for a while, which is the funding gap itself. Not just that it exists, but why it persists – and why I think we've been treating a habit as if it were a structural reality. Here's the honest version of what we're watching at IOI right now. The "someone else will handle it" loop Back in 2020 and 2021, we ran a series of focus groups with funders. Big philanthropies, living donor organizations, some of the more established foundations, and government funders. The conversation we kept circling back to was the question of who was responsible for the long-term maintenance and operational support of open infrastructure." Mon, 01 Jun 2026 05:47:00 -0400 https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/so-whos-actually-supposed-pay-kaitlin-thaney-xf25e/ oa.new oa.ioi oa.infrastructure oa.economics_of Abstract:  Abstract: This paper examines the growing tension between private digital repository governance and principles of freedom of expression, intellectual continuity, and academic preservation within contemporary online scholarly ecosystems. As academic communication becomes increasingly dependent upon privately administered repositories, DOI infrastructures, indexing systems, and algorithmically mediated visibility, significant questions emerge concerning the procedural safeguards surrounding intellectual preservation and the governance of lawful but unconventional academic contribution. The paper argues that dominant scholarly repositories may increasingly function as quasi-public intellectual infrastructures rather than ordinary private platforms, particularly where they exercise substantial influence over discoverability, citation continuity, metadata preservation, and long-term scholarly visibility. Building upon Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the paper proposes a conceptual "threshold model" under which repositories crossing certain levels of systemic scale, public reliance, and capacity for irreversible intellectual harm may require stronger transparency and due-process obligations. The discussion further examines the distinction between ordinary file moderation and the obscuration or disappearance of DOI-linked scholarly continuity. Particular attention is given to the role of metadata preservation, tombstone records, appeal pathways, and procedural transparency within infrastructures publicly associated with Open Science and long-term preservation commitments. A reflective interdisciplinary case discussion is included to illustrate the vulnerabilities faced by independent and boundary-crossing researchers operating within increasingly centralised digital knowledge systems. The case involves the unexpected removal or disabling of a large DOI-linked repository archive spanning themes including biomedical review and speculation, empathy and neuroethical research, sustainability systems, environmental resilience, governance theory, literary philosophy, cosmopoetics, psychology, symbolic cosmology, and interdisciplinary scientific-humanistic inquiry. Particular attention is given to the implications of opaque moderation processes, metadata discontinuity, and the disappearance or obscuration of DOI-associated scholarly records within infrastructures publicly associated with Open Science and long-term preservation commitments. The paper ultimately argues that the governance of digital scholarly preservation may become one of the defining academic-freedom, procedural-transparency, and knowledge-governance questions of the twenty-first century. Author's Note: The present paper does not claim that repositories are legally obligated under existing jurisprudence to treat all moderation actions as Article 10 matters. Rather, it proposes a normative and conceptual framework for future debate concerning whether dominant digital scholarly infrastructures may increasingly require quasi-public procedural obligations as their societal role expands.   Mon, 01 Jun 2026 05:40:00 -0400 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/405414796_Digital_Scholarly_Infrastructure_and_Freedom_of_Expression_Why_Dominant_Repositories_Should_Be_Bound_by_ECHR_Article_10 oa.new oa.infrastructure oa.repositories oa.green oa.discoverability oa.europe oa.human_rights oa.metadata oa.preservation oa.dois oa.censorship oa.academic_freedom oa.governance Abstract:  Research and scholarship are shaped by article citations, which underpin the communication of ideas, assignment of credit, journal impact factors, and author career progression. Given their key influence on author and journal metrics, citations can be intentionally manipulated to inflate the reputation of journals and researchers. Paper mills, unethical organisations that produce and sell manuscripts and publishing services, may also be manipulating citations, but the extent of this manipulation is unknown. Here, we show that molecular cancer articles sharing features with retracted papers from paper mills display citation patterns that suggest systematic inflation. These articles were published in journals in the top decile of journal rankings. Suspected paper mill articles received 50 to 100% more citations than other papers 1 to 3 years after publication, while paradoxically attracting fewer readers and online accesses. Suspected paper mill articles also cited – and were cited by – other suspected paper mill articles and appeared in journals previously reported as paper mill targets. The resulting citations from suspected paper mill articles measurably inflated journal citation metrics. These findings suggest that paper mills inflate the citation metrics of supported publications and affected journals. The manipulation of citation metrics at scale may amplify unreliable findings, slowing scientific progress, and providing unreasonable citation benchmarks for research articles, journals and authors. Our findings highlight new risks in relying on citation metrics for research and journal evaluation and support the use of more robust metrics to describe article and journal quality.   Mon, 01 Jun 2026 05:29:00 -0400 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.05.25.727627v1 oa.new oa.citations oa.impact oa.paper_mills oa.predatory oa.misconduct oa.metrics oa.trust oa.medicine "Sweeping new investigations probe the replication, robustness and reproducibility of results across the behavioural and social sciences. Together, these studies reveal encouraging strengths and persistent vulnerabilities in how scientific knowledge is built, and underscore a central truth: progress depends not just on discovery, but on our willingness to question, test and rebuild what we think we know." Mon, 01 Jun 2026 05:17:00 -0400 https://www.nature.com/collections/idajfifcfg oa.new oa.reproducibility oa.ssh "Lastly, we come to the “first among equals” Open Access Model, i.e., the Diamond or Platinum version. These journals do not charge APCs nor do they burden the readers with paywalls. This makes it the most equitable and sustainable model without any conflicts of interest, which can arise when journals charge APCs.[5] The Diamond Open Access Journals are fully financed by academic institutions, government bodies, or research societies and function fully on non-profit principles, making them the “first among equals.” The Medical Journal of Dr DY Patil Vidyapeeth falls in this category." Mon, 01 Jun 2026 05:13:00 -0400 https://journals.lww.com/mjdy/fulltext/2026/05000/open_access_publishing__first_among_equals.1.aspx oa.new oa.editorials oa.gold oa.green oa.no-fee oa.boai oa.hybrid oa.business_models oa.terminology oa.definitions Abstract:  I analyse Crossref metadata for around 250,000 journal articles published between 2019 and 2025. The analysis reveals that contractual language alone is insufficient to ensure implementation: coverage of specific metadata elements varied considerably across publishers and agreements, and explicit provisions do not consistently translate into higher coverage. A notable near-absence of ROR ID coverage across most agreements highlights gaps that undermine institutional attribution in research assessment and bibliometric analyses, while CC BY licence adoption is highest where agreements mandate it as the sole permissible licence. Mon, 01 Jun 2026 05:10:00 -0400 https://subugoe.github.io/scholcomm_analytics/posts/ta_coverage_analysis/main.html oa.new oa.metadata oa.offsets oa.ror oa.pids oa.licensing "In 2025, the open-science publisher Frontiers introduced FAIR² (“Fair Squared”) Data Management (Frontiers Media SA, 2026a & 2026b), a platform designed to support the publication and dissemination of research datasets through AI-assisted curation. The platform serves as both a discovery environment and a publishing infrastructure, structuring datasets to improve their findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability (FAIR) (FORCR11, 2011). The FAIR² framework extends these principles by emphasizing machine-actionable data structures and alignment with emerging responsible AI practices (Short, 2026; Zhou & Soulière, 2025). In this context, the platform aims to support datasets that are not only reusable by researchers but also suitable for computational analysis and AI-driven research workflows. A key feature of the model is the FAIR² Data Article, a peer-reviewed publication format dedicated to describing a single dataset rather than presenting hypothesis-driven research findings. The intention is to give datasets a level of scholarly recognition comparable to conventional research articles. Each dataset receives a persistent Digital Object Identifier (DOI) and is accompanied by FAIR² Compliance Certification, supporting transparency, traceability, and reproducibility. Datasets are typically distributed under the Open Data Commons Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0), allowing reuse with appropriate attribution." Sun, 31 May 2026 10:05:00 -0400 https://katinamagazine.org/content/article/resource-reviews/2026/fair2-data-management-review oa.new oa.publishing oa.infrastructure oa.data oa.fair2 oa.frontiers oa.ai oa.dois oa.pids "Diamond open access (OA)—understood to mean publishing without fees for either authors or readers—is often framed as an aspirational model for a more equitable scholarly communication system. In global discussions, it is frequently associated with Latin America or European community-led initiatives. China, by contrast, is rarely part of this conversation. But this absence may reflect less a lack of diamond open access practices and more a limitation in how such models are currently defined and recognized within global frameworks. The Chinese case suggests that prevailing classifications may overlook systems that achieve reader-side openness through structurally different, yet functionally comparable, approaches." Sun, 31 May 2026 10:01:00 -0400 https://katinamagazine.org/content/article/open-knowledge/2026/diamond-oa-in-china oa.new oa.no-fee oa.china oa.terminology oa.definitions oa.business_models oa.fees oa.asia "Last week, the Justice Department deleted thousands of press releases related to the Jan. 6 insurrection and other matters. Here they are." Sun, 31 May 2026 09:44:00 -0400 https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-justice-department-erases-history--lawfare-restores-it oa.new oa.usa oa.trump47 oa.negative oa.preservation Abstract:  Background: Injury is a global health problem, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Sustainable trauma registries in these settings require concise, locally relevant, and low-cost solutions. This methodology paper shares a minimal trauma registry dataset developed and tested over 7 years, together with its accompanying MS Access database, which is made freely available to help LMIC institutions establish locally owned trauma registries. Methods: Two prospectively tested registries were sequentially designed, implemented, analyzed, and refined in Al-Ain City, United Arab Emirates: a 200-variable single-center hospital registry and a 50-variable multicenter road traffic collision registry. Finally, an 80-variable Trauma and Emergency Research Group registry was developed. Variables were retained or removed according to feasibility, data completeness, clinical usefulness, prevention value, and demonstrated research utility. Results: The first registry enrolled 2573 patients over 3 years and the second enrolled 1008 patients over 18 months. Experience from these registries generated 21 publications from the first registry, 13 from the second, 3 combined analyses, and 5 follow-up studies, which informed the final open-access registry. The resulting tool is a five-page, 80-variable minimal dataset organized into seven sections: personal details, trauma details, road trauma details, emergency department assessment, discharge summary, death details, and injuries and scores. It balances prevention variables such as crash mechanics, safety equipment, education level, and injury location with core outcome variables needed for benchmarking and system evaluation. Conclusions: A carefully selected minimal dataset can support clinically useful, prevention-oriented, and affordable trauma surveillance in resource-limited settings. Making the form and accompanying MS Access database freely available may help LMIC institutions establish locally owned trauma registries that are scalable, sustainable, and adaptable to national systems, provided that minimum resources for implementation, maintenance, governance, data quality, and reporting are planned. Sun, 31 May 2026 07:46:00 -0400 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42215999/ oa.new oa.medicine oa.south oa.data Abstract:  PLOS Medicine has always championed open science and data transparency. Now, recognizing that code is as essential a research artifact as the data it analyzes, we are strengthening our code sharing policy to further ensure reproducibility and trust in the scientific record. Sun, 31 May 2026 05:49:00 -0400 https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1005107 oa.new oa.plos oa.plos_medicine oa.code oa.open_science oa.journals oa.policies oa.policies.journals oa.policies.journals.code oa.reproducibility oa.trust oa.medicine oa.floss Abstract:  This study examines the research data curation processes used in the comprehensive open distance e-learning (CODeL) institution that supports open science. As a result, this study discusses the research data curation processes employed by the institution. This study aimed to articulate the research data curation processes and best practices for managing datasets submitted to the repository at the CODeL institution. A qualitative content analysis was used to review full-text, peer-reviewed articles published between 2021 and 2026 under an open-access license. As a result, 24 eligible articles were retrieved from three identified databases: ProQuest, Library and Information Science Collection, and Web of Science. This study contributes a structure-based model of research data curation tailored for CODeL environments, enhancing institutional capacity for open data stewardship, and research visibility. Therefore, the CODeL institution supports open science by enabling data sharing through its repository.   Sat, 30 May 2026 11:29:00 -0400 https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5729/11/6/127 oa.new oa.education oa.data oa.open_science oa.repositories oa.ir oa.courseware oa.repositories.data