Defining an open access resource strategy for research libraries:Part Ⅱ——Challenges and responses

Purpose: This paper aims to provide a systematic analysis of challenges and responses of the imminent open access-based environment so as to enable sound development of open access(OA) resource strategies.Design/methodology/approach: A systematic and evidence-based analysis is used to discover, identify, and contextualize the factors that relate or interact. A challenge metric for the overall context and additional frameworks or alternative lists is used for the detailed analysis.Findings: Research libraries are facing a reality conflict between the traditional library solution and the OA solution. New resource strategies are needed but have to be based on an open knowledge infrastructure and a systematic analysis of factors and alternatives. Support for OA publishing is becoming a major task and complicated capabilities involved call for libraries to play a central role. Hybrid collection development should be in place to take full advantages of the open world while ensuring reliable and trusted retrieval, reuse, and preservation.Research limitations: The research covers main developments in US and European countries mostly in scientific fields and for scholarly papers.Practical implications: There are already evidences for sound OA resource policies. With the imminent dominance of OA resources, research libraries should and can set up their OA resource strategies.Originality/value: The paper suggests a factor metric as an analysis framework, presents rationale lists and policies to support OA publishing, and proposes a hybrid collection strategy to plan for collection development, retrieval, and preservation.

Implementing Open Access Policy:First case studies

When implementing open access, policy pioneers and flagship institutions alike have faced considerable challenges in meeting their own aims and achieving a recognized success. Legitimate authority, sufficient resources and the right timing are crucial, but the professionals charged with implementing policy still need several years to accomplish significant progress. This study defines a methodological standard for evaluating the first generation of open access policies. Evaluating implementation establishes evidence, enables reflection, and may foster the emergence of a second generation of open access policies.While the study is based on a small number of cases, these case studies cover most of the pioneer institutions, present the most significant issues and offer an international overview.Each case is reconstructed individually on the basis of public documents and background information, and supported by interviews with professionals responsible for open access implementation. This article presents the highlights from each case study. The results are utilized to indicate how a second generation of policies might define open access as a key component of digital research infrastructures that provide inputs and outputs for research,teaching and learning in real time.

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。

高校图书馆基于Open Access学术信息交流服务刍议

OA是一种全新理念的网络出版模式和学术信息交流模式。论文探讨了高校图书馆学术信息交流在OA环境中所面临的机遇和挑战,具体分析了OA的影响,以及高校图书馆应如何利用OA提升服务能力和质量。

数字化学术出版模式——Open Access

图书馆朝数字化方向发展到今天,Open-Access作为数字化学术出版模式,是信息共享的自由理念和出版机制。本文归纳分析了Open-Access的出现背景、实质内涵、运行机制和相关单位的职责。

学术期刊实现Open Access出版的模式与平台

介绍目前在学术出版界广为讨论的Open Access出版模式,指出Open Access对学术期刊发展的意义。同时介绍国内以期刊编辑部为主体的Open Access出版的概况和特点。结合目前国内流行的Open Access出版平台软件的功能,说明Open Access出版的技术基础,为期刊编辑部建立Open Access出版平台提供参考。

Open Access 2020战略背景下的开放获取期刊出版现状——第十二届欧洲学术出版会议综述

【目的】总结Open Access(OA)2020战略背景下欧洲开放获取运动发展新趋势,探索开放获取期刊出版现状以及存在的问题,为我国开放获取期刊发展提供参照。【方法】整理第十二届欧洲学术出版会议的资料和交流情况,分析内容,研究文献。【结果】阐述了当前国际开放获取运动发展状况以及欧洲开放获取期刊出版目前存在的问题。【结论】OA2020战略的提出以及实施切实推动了开放获取运动的发展,促进了开放获取期刊的繁荣,但是同时也存在出版商缺乏原生动力、开放存取期刊面临信任危机、缺少资金的领域和机构难以实现开放获取等问题。

Integrity of the editing and publishing process is the basis for improving an academic journal’s Impact Factor

BACKGROUND Journal Impact Factor™(JIF)is often used to evaluate the relative reputation and quality of academic journals in their respective fields,and can greatly influence the quality and scope of subsequent manuscript submissions.Therefore,many if not all academic journals are interested in increasing their JIF,to improve their academic impact.AIM To determine the importance of the integrity of the editorial and publication process in improving the academic influence of academic journals and the JIF of academic journals.METHODS In this paper,we describe our statistical analysis of bibliometric factors-including the 2021 JIFs released in the Journal Citation Report™2022,discipline rankings,received and published articles in 2019-2021,and webpage visits and downloads-for seven journals published by Baishideng Publishing Group(Baishideng)and indexed in Science Citation Index Expanded™;ultimately,we introduce and discuss the editing and publishing processes of Baishideng’s journals in their entirety,as they form the basis for our objective of safeguarding and bolstering integrity in academic publication.RESULTS For the seven journals assessed,their 2021 JIFs were basically unchanged from 2020,with the current metric ranging from 5.374 for World Journal of Gastroenterology(WJG)to 1.534 for World Journal of Clinical Cases(WJCC).Further assessments of the journals’bibliometrics from 2019 to 2020,showed that World Journal of Stem Cells has the highest self-citation rate(1.43%)and World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery has the lowest(0.21%).Additionally,the total 3012 articles published during this period were cited by more than 20000 articles in approximately 8000 academic journals.Of note,the 1102 articles published in WJG were cited by articles in 3059 journals,among which 171 journals have a JIF of>10,including internationally renowned academic journals such as CA-A Cancer Journal for Clinicians(2021 JIF 286.130,record count:1),Lancet(2021 JIF 202.731,record count:4),Nature Reviews Immunology(2021 JIF 108.555,record count:2),Nature Reviews Gastroenterology&Hepatology(2021 JIF 73.082,record count:9),Lancet Gastroenterology&Hepatology(2021 JIF 45.042,record count:8),Gastroenterology(2021 JIF 33.883,record count:19),and Gut(2021 JIF 31.793,record count:21).This suggests that Baishideng’s journals have been widely recognized for their academic quality.In the Reference Citation Analysis(RCA)database,all seven Baishidengpublished journals obtained a 2022 Journal Article Influence Index(JAII).For example,WJG has a 2022 JAII of 22.048,ranking 18th out of 102 journals in the field of gastroenterology&hepatology in the RCA,with 469909 total citations(6/102)and 21313 total articles(5/102).The numbers of manuscripts received and published in 2021 were both higher than those in 2019-2020.For example,WJCC received a total of 3650 manuscripts in 2021,which is 91.1%higher than those in 2019-2020(average:1910 papers/year).In 2021,WJCC published 1296 articles,representing an increase of 105.1%compared to those in 2019-2020(average:632 articles/year).The numbers of webpage visits and downloads received by the seven journals have increased year by year.For example,the number of total visits received by WJG in 2019-2021 was 1974052 in 2019,2317835 in 2020(increased by 17.4%compared with that in 2019),and 2652555 in 2021(increased by 4.4%compared with that in 2020).The visitors were from more than 220 countries and regions worldwide,such as the United States,China,and the United Kingdom.Open access(OA)plays a vital role in improving the quality,efficiency,transparency,and integrity of academic journal publishing.From 2019 to 2021,a total of 5543 OA articles were published in the seven journals,of which 2083(37.6%)were invited and published free-of-charge.During the same period,1683 articles were published in WJG,and the authors were from more than 70 countries and regions.For the total 5543 articles published in the seven journals from 2019 to 2021,3903 article quality tracking reports were received after the online publication of these articles.The quality of the articles was further evaluated through the Baishideng’s article quality and author evaluation tracking system,with 4655 articles(84.0%)having received author evaluation and feedback,which contributes to tracking metrics for authors’satisfaction with the collective publication processes.From March 25,2021 to June 28,2022,the seven journals received a total of 424 reader evaluations and 229 letters from readers;this subsequent reader engagement demonstrates that the popularity of the published articles and the volume of their readership audience were improved through the reader evaluation system.CONCLUSION Ultimately,the findings from our bibliometric assessments indicate that establishing,promoting and actively practicing processes that safeguard and bolster the integrity of the editing and publication process also help to improve the academic influence of academic journals,which itself is the cornerstone for improving JIF.

基于开放获取转换协议的数据库采购价格博弈分析——以ACM OPEN模型为例

在对开放获取转换协议主要类型进行分析的基础上,以ACM OPEN转换协议模型为例,结合我国“双一流”高校在ACM的发文情况展开价格博弈分析,并针对转换过程中图书馆将面临的政策、经费、机制建设等问题提出建议,以期推动中国高校图书馆积极部署并开展开放获取出版转型相关研究,为我国学术成果开放获取和可持续发展谋求符合国家核心利益的开放获取转型之路。

数智时代学术期刊转型融合路径研究——基于爱墨瑞德的经验启示

近年来,随着我国一系列推进出版业数字化转型和融合发展政策出台和落地,国内学术期刊出版业的转型和融合发展逐渐走入深水区,新技术、新标准、新模式、新平台的涌现带来了机遇与挑战。文章聚焦英国老牌出版商爱墨瑞德,以Web of Science数据库发布的期刊引文报告为基础,采用案例分析与归纳法对其品牌价值、商业模式和数字平台进行全景剖析。研究发现,在学术出版上,爱墨瑞德通过对优势学科内容的纵向扩展和横向衍生,构建丰富的期刊矩阵和知识服务体系。在商业模式上,顺应开放获取出版的潮流,积极开发数字服务产品,延伸学术出版产业链、价值链,完成主要利润来源的迁移。在平台建设上,打造集学术发现、交流和传播于一体的一站式数字空间。通过这三条路径,爱墨瑞德实现了成功转型和融合发展。文章借鉴相关经验,从集约化、数据化和场景化三个维度,提出了我国学术期刊的转型和融合发展策略。

预印本学术交流模式演化历程与我国发展对策研究

科学交流载体的演变、开放获取运动的推动及学术出版模式的创新,使预印本逐步成为备受关注的科学交流模式。在相关主体的联合推进下,学术界逐渐接受和认可预印本的学术交流价值。本文梳理了预印本学术交流模式演化历程,将预印本学术交流的发展分为四个阶段:小型学术团体驱动的探索实验期(1990年前)、学科与技术驱动的初创时期(1991—2012年)、多主体驱动的极速扩张时期(2013—2019年)和疫情影响下的加速发展时期(2020年至今)。从平台类型、出版融合、技术创新、学术社区团体、成果认可和运营经费等方面出发,总结归纳预印本学术交流模式的发展特征,并对我国预印本学术交流体系的发展提出对策和建议:(1)加强预印本著作权认可,保障预印本首发权认定;(2)促进预印本和期刊协同发展,形成统一的开放学术出版流程;(3)构建预印本论文开放评议机制,化解“以刊评文”难题;(4)营造预印本学术交流氛围,培育中国预印本文化;(5)开放互联形成集群效应,提升预印本平台的国际影响力。图1。参考文献44。

我国高校学生开放获取学术资源使用意愿研究

在文献研究基础上,借鉴使用与满足理论和ECM模型构建开放获取学术资源使用意愿影响因素模型,并通过对我国高校在校学生的大规模问卷调查获取研究数据,最终利用AMOS分析软件对模型进行实证检验。发现调查所及的8610位高校中在校学生仅有12.45%使用过OA学术资源;证实影响我国高校在校学生使用OA学术资源的关键因素是对OA运动缺乏了解,其他根据影响大小依次为外部环境、期望满足、资源质量、平台功能和使用成本。在厘清这些影响因素的基础上,提出有效提升我国高校学生OA资源使用意愿的对策。

CSSCI来源期刊互联网全文获取分布情况的调查分析与启示

文章采用网络调查法,对CSSCI来源期刊在商业数据库和开放获取渠道中全文获取分布情况进行调查统计和分析。调查显示,中国知网在商业数据库中拥有绝对优势、商业数据库之间排他性竞争明显、开放获取取得阶段性成功、开放获取与付费服务并行、商业数据库向开放获取靠拢。分析指出,开放获取资源与中国知网收录数量比较接近,但没有发挥出应有的效益。建议高校和科研机构应摆脱对商业数据库的依赖,在文献资源服务中充分利用开放获取资源。

学术会议交流平台的融媒体资源建设初探

学术会议是重要的学术交流形式,会议文献是传递科技信息、交流科技成果的重要科技信息源之一,是科技信息高端交流平台的重要组成部分。随着《关于推动出版深度融合发展的实施意见》的出台,全媒体时代的高质量期刊、高水平学术交流平台的建设迫在眉睫。系统整理和归纳期刊文献在融媒体建设方面可借鉴的发展策略,梳理国内外学术会议交流平台的融媒体资源建设现状,指出当前学术会议交流平台的融媒体资源建设在分类收集、整合检索、个人版权、时效和质量方面存在的不足,针对这些问题提出对策建议,以期推动学术会议交流平台的融媒体资源建设,并为我国科技信息高端交流平台建设提供参考。

迈入开放科学生态系统构建加速期:2022年海外学术期刊出版发展报告

本报告系统梳理2022年419篇海外学术期刊出版理念与实践的相关论文、报告和文章,以“环境-制度-实践”为框架,通过Nvivo11计算机辅助质性数据分析软件进行三轮编码,来展现开放科学背景下海外学术期刊出版全景。研究发现,海外学术期刊出版界正从产业、技术、社会环境上构建开放、共享、公正、可信的开放科学生态,并在制度与实践层面进行相应建设与创新。第一,海外学术出版商商业整合和并购加速,转向为深度嵌入研究全过程的服务平台。作为重要驱动引擎的基础设施不断完善,数据共享、跨平台协作式基础设施以及文化规范重要性愈加凸显,共同推动学术期刊从结果开放走向过程开放。第二,开放科学制度建设力量不断扩充,各国开放科学新政加速出台,制度化进程全面提速,交易制度、学术评价体系逐步规范化。第三,海外学术期刊出版商以改进工作流和服务科研范式变革为核心展开实践,共同推进学术期刊开放科学生态系统构建。

开放获取与学术出版模式的再造——基于多利益攸关方模式的分析

为抵抗出版巨头在学术出版领域近乎垄断性的主导权,包括黑客行动者、NGO、政府等在内的各种利益主体积极探索开放获取的可能性并展开了系列实践。本文梳理了多种不同利益主体主导的开放获取出版模式,并以多利益攸关方模型及SWOT分析框架为依据,重点讨论以ResearchGate为代表的多主体协同开放获取模式对推进开放获取的可能性。论文认为开放获取即使没有完全打破出版巨头对学术出版的控制体系,但也正在逐渐改变它。重回版权理念初心、重回利益制衡可能是再造学术出版模式的核心命题。

图情档CSSCI来源期刊开放获取现状研究——纪念《苏州宣言》发布10周年

2022年是《中国图书馆学情报学期刊开放获取出版苏州宣言》(简称《苏州宣言》)发布的第10周年,探讨我国图情档CSSCI来源期刊开放获取现状、问题与策略,对我国图情档面向学科建设的学术资源交流与共享具有重要意义。文章通过期刊官网、纸质期刊、邮件、电话询问等渠道,从主办机构、开放内容、质量控制、论文出版与使用、用户服务等5个角度对图情档CSSCI来源期刊开放获取现状进行分析。研究发现:我国图情档专业期刊在《苏州宣言》发布10周年期间明显加快了开放获取的步伐,但面临着政策、认知、经费、平台等制约,需要就政策支持、宣传推广、经费保障、平台建设等方面探寻图情档学术期刊开放获取的有效策略。

基于开放获取的图书馆学术出版策略与发展模式探析

近年来,开放获取运动的蓬勃发展对用户、出版商和图书馆均产生了不同程度的影响。基于这一背景,提出图书馆作为学术出版支持者、参与者和执行者应采取的学术出版策略;指出图书馆应与出版社、学报和数字出版机构合作开展学术出版服务,借力发展,打造新形势下图书馆的核心竞争力。

CALIS机构知识库:建设与推广、反思与展望

CALIS三期"机构知识库建设及推广项目",旨在揭示和推广我国高校的学术资源和学术成果,帮助高校发布、共享和保护已形成的知识、科学和文化遗产的数字化资源,并通过聚集和开放获取增加其附加值,进一步促进学术交流。项目建设的目标是建立"分散部署、集中揭示"的全国高校机构知识库。本文从三个方面介绍项目建设情况:①调研、准备和启动等组织实施工作;②技术路线,IR系统功能和服务方式等建设方案;③系统开发,应用部署,标准规范制定,机构知识库资源建设以及机构知识库推广宣传等建设成果。最后就政策支持、模式定位、内容甄选、宣传推广、技术平台等方面提出问题并进行反思和展望。

国内外学术图书馆参与开放存取出版的实践进展述略——从出版途径的视角

文章从开放存取出版的角度调研和梳理了学术图书馆参与期刊、图书、研究数据、知识库开放存取出版的实践进展。调研和分析发现学术图书馆参与开放存取出版的表现为:指导期刊出版,建设并管理期刊索引平台,开发或资助在线出版平台并直接进行期刊内容出版,提供或管理作者文章处理费用专项基金;加入开放存取图书索引平台和资源联盟组织并直接进行开放存取图书出版;参与数据政策制定或推介、数据管理出版平台建设、数据管理计划工具开发应用,数据生命周期管理和数据出版质量控制;通过知识库索引系统、联盟和机构库方式参与基于开放存取知识库的出版。