css.php

Editor’s Choice: 2018 in review: round-up of our top posts on open access | Impact of Social Sciences

Source: 2018 in review: round-up of our top posts on open access | Impact of Social Sciences

This post originally appreared in LSE  Impact Blog http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2018/12/27/2018-in-review-round-up-of-our-top-posts-on-open-access/

Adoption of open access is rising – but so too are its costs Options available to authors to make their work open access are on the rise. Adoption of open access itself is also rising, and usage of open-access materials is similarly increasing. However, alongside rising access levels another, less positive rise can also be […]

Read More of this post…


 

Editor’s Choice: It’s time for “pushmi-pullyu” open access: servicing the distinct needs of readers and authors

This excerpt by Toby Green originally appeared in LSE Impact Blog  on October 24, 2017

The open access movement has failed. Self-archiving and open-access journals are struggling to deliver 100% open access and probably never will. Moreover, readers, the curious minds it was hoped research would be opened to, have been marginalised from the debate. Toby Green suggests an unbundling of the often disparate, distinct services required by readers and authors; a new model for scholarly communications based on Doctor Dolittle’s “pushmi-pullyu”. The specific needs of authors preparing their papers and data for publication can be serviced on one side of the pushmi-pullyu; while on the other, freemium services ensure research is discoverable and readable by all, without payment, and a premium layer of reader-focused services ensures the evolving needs of readers are met…

Read More…