基于OA期刊与OA知识库实现途径的比较分析

开放存取(Open Access)是一种全新的学术出版模式.文章归纳分析了实现开放存取出版的两种主要途径,并从质量控制、经费支持、知识产权、存储对象等方面对两者作一比较分析.     

学术图书馆参与数字出版的动因与条件分析

[目的/意义]了解学术图书馆对新的出版环境的感知和应对情况以及学术图书馆出版服务现状,分析学术图书馆参与数字出版的潜在动力和优势条件,从理论与实践两方面论证学术图书馆参与数字出版服务的重要性、必要性和可行性。[方法/过程]首先介绍学术图书馆在促进学术交流中所承担的角色与使命,分析学术出版的功能作用;讨论学术图书馆参与数字出版的潜在效益。继之,主要选取分别代表开放存取期刊、仓储和图书的DOAJ、OPenDOAR、DOAB作为开放存取出版现状的调研对象,选择ARL和SPARC研究图书馆出版服务相关报告并调研图书馆出版联盟,以了解国内外学术图书馆的出版服务现状。在此基础上,进一步分析总结学术图书馆参与数字出版所具备的内容资源、技术平台、用户、人才等方面的优势条件,并简要讨论学术图书馆参与数字出版的角色和功能定位。[结果/结论]总结学术图书馆参与数字出版的动因和条件以及可能面临的不确定性,并相应提出可能的应对策略。     

Economics Journals

Abstract

This paper evaluates the comprehensiveness and composition of university library holdings of economics journals of three types of institutions: schools that offer a doctoral degree program in economics; schools that offer a master's degree in economics, and schools that offer only a baccalaureate degree in economics. The results offer useful information for university libraries and economics educators responsible for deciding whether the current holdings should be maintained or, if not, which journals should be added or deleted.     

The End of Print Journals

SUMMARY

Scholarly journals have been moving from paper only to paper plus electronic versions. Cessation of the paper version requires satisfying diverse needs of librarians, university administrators, authors, readers, and publishers.     

Re-Automation of Serials Control

No abstract available for this article.     

Evaluation and publication delay in Ibero-American scientific journals

This article analyses the review, acceptance and publication dates of a sample of 21,890 articles from 326 Ibero-American scientific journals from all subject areas and countries included in the Latindex Catalogue 2.0 and published between 2018 and 2020 (freely available as an open access dataset). The aim is to discover evaluation and publication times. The evaluation process takes a median of 110 days, the publication process, a median of 82 days, and the whole process, a median of 224 days. Statistical differences are found according to periodicity, subject areas, countries, existence of a printed version and article type (Call for Papers or General articles). From the data we find that the delay in publication is longer than publishers themselves report to the DOAJ. STEM areas present the most similarity in publication patterns, having a higher number of evaluation days (Ed) than publication days (Pd); Arts and Humanities present the opposite pattern, with a higher Pd than Ed. In the case of Social Sciences, the times are similar. General articles and Call for Papers articles differ in terms of Ed, but not Pd, indicating that Call for Papers revisions are faster.     

Library Involvement in Faculty Publication Funds

A faculty publication fund is a fairly new concept in scholarly communication, and academic institutions are experimenting with different models for the administration of funds designed to assist faculty who face prohibitive journal publication charges. Findings are reported from a survey-based, qualitative study of small and medium-sized academic libraries involved with open access faculty publication funds. The survey results and a case study of one library's involvement in fund development are considered in light of the broader research questions: How are libraries engaging as facilitators of scholarly publishing, and what successes and challenges are they facing in this new role?     

The Growing Crisis: Scholarly Publishing Pressures Facing Health Sciences Libraries

ABSTRACT

Health sciences librarians work within a complex environment, one that quickly adopted access to electronic resources. The open access movement evolved as an alternative to traditional publishing as prices for STM e-journals steadily increased, but it also raised issues and concerns for authors within the more traditional biomedical culture. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Public Access policy provided an opportunity to support researchers’ compliance with the policy, while advocating for open access and author rights. As an outgrowth of the NIH policy, health sciences libraries have promoted open access through a variety of activities within their academic health centers.     

科技期刊OA出版的文献计量分析

开放存取(open access,OA)是当前科技期刊出版的焦点,为科技期刊的发展带来了机遇和挑战。本文概述OA运动中占有主导地位的两方在OA出版中的现状:公共基金资助机构对OA出版的诉求和传统大型出版商的OA转型;结合Web of Science数据库对OA出版现状进行计量学调查,提出了OA出版处于初级阶段的论点并总结了各学科OA出版的发展程度。从论文的出版数量和期刊的数量及影响力来看,传统期刊和混合期刊是目前主要的出版模式。     

Web3.0时代学术期刊开放同行评议的实质和审稿模型构建

为了解决同行评议中不公平、不透明、时效性差的问题,提出改变审稿方式,采用开放同行评议的办法.在分析开放同行评议透明、交互、高效、共享、完整实质的基础上,尝试构建开放同行评议的审稿模型,并指出制订规范的编辑出版政策,构建专业化投稿和审稿平台,调动参与者的积极性,是实施开放同行评议的关键环节.     

国外学术交流开放存取发展综述

介绍开放存取的含义、基本特征、发展背景,说明其对传统学术交流过程的变革、与信息资源共享的关系,并对国外学术交流开放存取的发展过程予以梳理,最后分析开放存取对我国学术交流的启示。     

Hand Wringing in Paradise: Scholarly Communication and the Intimate Twinges of Conscience

ABSTRACT

Scholarly communication today is in the midst of a healthy and long running crisis that has been good for libraries, good for scholars and good for publishers. It is a reflection of a hypercompetitive academic environment and a ruthless academic winnowing and reward system. Large commercial publishers have successfully manipulated this system with the complicity of library consortia, which has led in turn to the birth of the expensive and at times counter-productive open access movement that later reached its nadir with the problematic SCOAP (Sponsoring Consortium for Open Access Publishing in Particle Physics) episode. In our obsession with navel gazing we have forgotten the decisive role that China will play in future developments in scholarly communication.

This article originally published in Journal of Library Administration, Vol. 51, Issues 5–6, pages 415–431, 2011. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2011.589335.     

开放获取的发展与推动因素

开放获取发展的历史不长，但显示出强劲的发展势头，得到了学术界、高等院校、专业团体、图书馆、基金会、国际组织、以及期刊出版商和有关方面的热情关注和广泛支持。这些不同方面的因素在推动开放获取中发挥着不同的作用，共同促进了开放获取的发展。文章总结分析了这些不同的方面在推动开放获取方面所发挥的促进作用和所产生的积极影响。     

国外高校图书馆学术出版素养教育实践与思考

[目的/意义] 目前我国的学术出版素养教育尚处于起步阶段,缺乏一定的实践基础,亟需借鉴和学习国外高校图书馆在学术出版素养教育方面的经验,以期为我国高校学术出版素养教育提供一定的参考。[方法/过程] 基于学术出版素养的内涵,选取美国、英国、加拿大和澳大利亚等国家的高校图书馆网站,通过网络调查方法对国外高校图书馆学术出版素养教育的情况进行调查,并对国外高校图书馆学术出版素养教育的模式、内容和对象进行归纳。[结果/结论] 结合国外的经验,针对我国高校图书馆学术出版素养教育的现状,围绕教育对象的观念认知、教育内容、教育主体、教育模式和教育合作等方面进行思考,对我国高校图书馆开展学术出版素养教育具有一定的借鉴意义。     

Publishing 101: The Basics of Academic Publishing

Rolnik's preconference went well beyond the “business of publishing from a very basic perspective” as described in the conference program. Rolnik's preconference described the publishing market, operations within publishing companies, and how publishers find content. Dr. Peter Binfield, a guest speaker with expertise in society publishing, complemented the preconference.     

试析Open Access对大学图书馆的影响

主要介绍作为学术资源开放传播新模式的开放获取运动内容，并针对大学图书馆的资源采购、馆藏建设、服务以及角色定位，讨论开放获取运动对大学图书馆的影响。