Open Access Requirements for Horizon 2020-Funded Projects

country-158013_640

Open Access Mandate:  All H2020 projects must provide open access (OA) to all peer-reviewed scientific publications that stem from project activities, immediately or otherwise within 6/12 months of publication where publisher embargoes apply.  Non-compliance can lead to a grant reduction and potential sanctions”

Read the JISC scholarly communications blog post by Frank Manista to find out how you should be meeting your Horizon 2020 open access obligations.
See http://bit.ly/2vubWQF for:

OA Publications resulting from a project
Open Research Data Project

Link to: Guidelines to the Rules on Open Access to Scientific Publications and Open Access to Research Data in Horizon 2020.

 

Academic Awareness of 2014 UK Copyright Reforms

Please link to a survey conducted by our colleague Chris Morrison at Kent University around the use of the educational exceptions provided by the Copyright Designs and Patents Act.

The survey is aimed at UK academics and is launched today to inform the UUK and GuildHE response to the IPO call for evidence on copyright reforms.

https://kent.onlinesurveys.ac.uk/copyright-law-review-uuk

“The survey is deliberately short in order to get as many responses as possible. The survey closes on Sunday 7th April and although we are aware this is a very short time frame, we are hoping we will get enough of a response to gather some meaningful data”

Swansea University will be returning a response to the IPO call for evidence to review 2014 copyright reforms as part of WHELF (Welsh Higher Education Libraries Forum).

You can find information on the CDPA educational exceptions and how they benefit teachers and researchers via our Copyright Library Guide:

https://libguides.swansea.ac.uk/copyright/information
https://libguides.swansea.ac.uk/Hawlfraint

copyright-1481585_1280

Image credit via Pixabay

URL change for Journal Citation Reports

From 22nd March the direct url for:

Journal Citation reports shows impact factors and other journal metrics.

ESI shows influential researchers and papers as well as emerging research areas.

Incites allows analysis of universities and identifies influential researchers and collaborators in a similar way to Scival.

  If you are using the services off campus you will need to register first via the Sign In option at the top right of the screen.

pin-board-978197_1280

 

 

The myths surrounding open scholarly publishing

We were interested to spot this new preprint by Professor Tom Crick et al, discussing the ten myths around Open Scholarship publishing. The paper, which is open for comment, delves into the evolving framework and core issues surrounding Open Research, Open Science and Open Scholarship.

TenMyths.Crick.CC-BY (3)

Whilst it is hard to pick out a ‘favourite’ myth, there are some particularly cogent points highlighted in Myth 6, Copyright Transfer, which deserve wider discussion and dissemination amongst academics. With Plan S hovering into view with the requirement that authors and universities retain copyright in their scientific research articles rather than transfer it to publishers, this topic needs much wider visibility.

If you want to explore the debate you can read the full text of the article here: https://peerj.com/preprints/27580/

PeerJ Preprints | https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.27580v1| CC BY 4.0 Open Access|

 

Latest REF guidance

guidance

A few links to help you through the latest REF guidance:

New full guidance

The key points

Including: Some clarification on staff who have significant responsibility for research, portability of outputs, some variation in the rules for co-authored output and clarification that there are no advantages or disadvantages in flagging a work as interdisciplinary.

Blog post from Catriona Firth of Research England “The REF guidance isn’t trying to catch you out”

Blog post from Stephen Hill of Research England “Reflecting on the guiding principles for REF2021”

Six important things you need to know about impact from the REF2021 guidance by Mark Reed on the LSE Impact blog

 

Predatory publishers

crocodile-1660512_1920

We have blogged before about predatory publishers but a training session today suggested some tips people might find useful:

  • Some journals lie about an impact factor. If you are in doubt about a journal go to http://wok.mimas.ac.uk then click the purple login button. You will find Journal Citation Reports right at the top of the screen and can check any claims.
  • Be suspicious of any journal which claims to publish very quickly with peer review – this usually takes time.
  • Where you can, check out journal editors. In a good journal they should be someone with a track record in the field.
  • Suncat is a union catalogue showing the journal holdings of many UK academic libraries. If a journal is not held by any library, or perhaps only one, it may be suspect. However, you do need to bear in mind that there may be genuine new journals which don’t appear yet.
  • DOAJ, the Directory of Open Access Journals, carries out some quality checks on the journals it lists.

It is also worth being aware that some conferences are run purely to make money without giving any value. Think Check Attend gives some things to think about if you are considering a new conference.

International Journal of Population Data Science (IJPDS)

dry6ualx0aa5bp_

On Monday 12th November 2018, IJPDS is changing the publishing licence from the current Creative Commons
CC-BY-ND to 
CC-BY

 

 

The International Journal of Population Data Science (IJPDS) is an electronic, open-access, peer-reviewed journal focussing on the science pertaining to population data. It publishes articles on all aspects of research, development and evaluation connected with data about people and populations.

It is published by Swansea University.

Why is IJPDS changing to CC-BY?
At IJPDS, sharing research freely is at the heart of everything we do and, as an Open Access journal, it is important that we uphold the Open Access ethos of making research freely accessible to all without restriction.

We currently publish articles under the CC-BY-ND licence, but this restricts the freedom to make changes and to distribute derivatives, thereby blocking or restricting the creation of derivative works. Our decision to migrate to the CC-BY licence will allow others more freedom to engage with IJPDS author’s research whilst still protecting the author’s moral rights.

  • the freedom to use published research and associated benefits of using it
  • the freedom to study manuscripts and to apply knowledge acquired from them
  • the freedom to make and redistribute copies of the information
  • the freedom to make changes and improvements, and to distribute derivative works

Funder Requirements
Increasing numbers of research funders stipulate the use of CC-BY when publishing via Open Access. Subsequently, IJPDS already offers the CC-BY licence to authors funded by RCUK / Wellcome Trust. We also use the CC0 “No rights reserved” licence for publishing source data that permits its re-use. IJPDS is now simply extending the right to freely access and use published research by rolling CC-BY out to cover all published works.

Benefits of CC-BY
By removing the restriction on derivative works, CC-BY opens up more options for using the research e.g. new ways of representing scholarly articles through text-mining and visualization techniques or allowing articles to be translated into other languages, and encouraging engagement with manuscripts through wider use has clear benefits to the authors.

Protecting Authors
Publishing under a free license does not mean that authors lose all their rights and any use of manuscripts published in IJPDS still require full attribution (i.e. giving credit and recognition to the author of a manuscript). Creative Commons licences require that no modifications to manuscripts should ‘be prejudicial to the Original Author’s honor or reputation’ (http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions).

Please note that manuscripts already published IJPDS prior to Monday 12th November 2019 will remain as CC-BY-ND, unless we receive a request from the authors to change to CC-BY.

Guest post by Sharon Hindley, IJPDS Marketing Manager.
Tweet to @IJPDS

Wellcome Trust new open access policy

open access

Wellcome Trust have just updated their open access policy which will last until Jan 2020. Although Swansea does not have a large number of Wellcome funded academics this is an interesting development as it follows a big review and is an attempt to work within the Plan S policy put forward by the European Commission.

  • It stipulates that articles must be freely available through PubMed Central as soon as they are published.
  • They have to be published under a CC-BY licence.
  • They will only fund articles in journals which appear in DOAJ and will not cover publishing in subscription journals.
  • All research articles will have to include a statement explaining how other researchers can access the data, software and materials underpinning the research.
  • They encourage publication of preprints under a CC-BY licence.
  • When they assess research outputs for funding they will judge on intrinsic merit, not the title of the journal or publisher.

As the cost of publishing in “hybrid” journals has kept rising and they are harder to discover than articles in fully open access journals this could be the start of a trend. One to watch….

 

 

 

#ThesisThursday – Open Access Week 2018

Today is #ThesisThursday on Twitter, part of the activities celebrating International Open Access Week.

We asked our guest blogger Julia Terry to tell us about her recently completed Swansea University PhD.

College of Human and Health Sciences / Swansea University / 20th March 2018

What was the most important or overarching finding of your research?

My thesis focused on exploring talk about mental health nursing. I interviewed mental health service users, nurses and nursing students. In today’s healthcare climate we expect to see more practice that involves patients/service users in nursing processes. In Wales this is legislated for in mental health settings. However, my main finding was that there was limited talk about service user involvement in nursing processes and that involvement does not appear feature as a main part of mental health  nurses’ professional identity. Generally, service user involvement was spoken about very little, with service users voicing dissatisfaction with the limited time nurses spent with them, and nurses describing their roles as mostly task focussed.

What was the most surprising thing that you discovered; was there anything odd or unexpected?

It was surprising that nursing students said they had little understanding about service user involvement in nursing processes and had seen few good examples in practice. However, whilst these results were surprising, other studies in the UK have also found limited service user involvement in mental health care planning and that their expectations from nurses have not always been met.

What was the biggest challenge that you encountered during your PhD, and did it change the direction of your research?

The biggest challenge was the part-time nature of my PhD. I was very well supported and encouraged all the way through my journey. It was essential that I kept up my organisation and time management skills in order that I remained on track.

Have you any words of wisdom for any researchers who might be embarking on a similar programme of research?

Keeping a research log from the beginning is a good idea. I kept short notes on my progress all the way through and even took these in to my Viva exam. It means you have everything in one place, and can track your progress easily.

Read Julia’s thesis in our repository, Cronfa.

Title: Talking about mental health nursing: a qualitative analysis of nurses’ and service users’ accounts

Supervisors: Professor Michael Coffey & Dr Jeanette Hewitt

Link:  https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa43230

posted by Caroline Rauter

Open Access – not just for REF

 

Open_Access_Week_-_Web_HeaderWe often come across staff who think they only need to deposit their work in RIS if they will be putting it forward for the REF. However, open access can give higher visibility and increased impact. It is increasingly required by government and funders, and  university policy. It also contributes to the democratization of research since articles are free to all.

Ideally you should build open access into your research cycle:

  • Producing a proposal – do you have  funds for article processing charges? Does your funder have open access requirements you need to meet (You can check using Sherpa Juliet)
  • Literature review – you might want to search the open access aggregator CORE 
  • Collecting dataopen research data is increasingly on the agenda of funders.
  • Writing up – does your chosen journal meet your funder’s criteria.

University open access policy states that “Wherever possible researchers will be expected to make all published research outputs available as Green Open Access” with the aim to “collect, disseminate and promote the scholarly output of the university’s staff as widely as possible”

Why wouldn’t you publish open access?

  • It’s complicated and I don’t understand what my publisher allows.
  • I have no funding
    • if you are funded by UKRI we can pay an APC for you. If you are not eligible for this you can deposit your accepted manuscript in the Research Information System to make your work open access, perhaps after an embargo period.
  • I think it limits my choice of journal
    •  if you use the green route of depositing in a repository, most journals allow open access so it shouldn’t have a significant effect on your freedom to publish where you wish.