Abstract / OSI2017 Workgroup Question Following up on a proposal from OSI2016, this workgroup will identify and/or design new funding models for open scholarship, such as a venture fund that can allow more support for joint efforts, or propose ways to improve existing funding by improving the flexibility of library budgets (e.g. by examining the...Read More
Abstract / OSI2017 Workgroup Question Following a common thread from throughout OSI2016, this workgroup will develop partnership proposals for this community to work together to improve the culture of communication inside academia, particularly inside research. As part of this effort, it may be important to clarify messaging surrounding the benefits and impacts of open access...Read More
Scholarly publishing has been in a state of transition for several decades now, driven by the rapid evolution and expectations of our digital society, the explosion and specialization of research over this period of time, and importantly, a concerted effort—led in large part by the open access movement—to make more of the world’s research information...Read More
Abstract Repositories are a vital tool in modern information management and a key component of preservation and long-term availability. They are not well-suited, however, to the current challenges posed by our information-rich society and the multitude of stakeholders involved in the modern scholarly publishing system. Strengthening repositories and standardizing preservation processes are critically important. This...Read More
OSI2016 Workgroup Question Are the scholarly publishing tools we’re using today still the right ones? Is the monograph still the best format in the humanities? Is the journal article still best in STM? These products can be difficult to produce and edit, nearly impenetrable to read, and—as in the case of clinical research information—they aren’t...Read More
Abstract The duality of information overload and underload is a defining issue of our age. Scholarly information is abundant but not universally accessible to all scholars and learners, thereby hindering or prohibiting equitable engagement in ongoing scholarly conversations. Access is a core aspect of the issue of overload and underload—both access to research materials and...Read More
OSI2016 Workgroup Question Do researchers and scientists participate in the current system of scholarly publishing because they like it, they need it, they don’t have a choice in the matter, or they don’t really care one way or another? What perceptions, considerations and incentives do academicians have for staying the course (like impact factors and...Read More
Abstract / OSI2016 Workgroup Question The At-Large workgroup was the largest and most diverse in terms of stakeholder representation. At-large delegates observed workgroup conversations during the meeting and contributed to these conversations while letting the workgroup teams answer their questions. At-large delegates met during the conference and convened online both before and after the conference...Read More
Abstract A small, self-selected workgroup was convened to consider issues surrounding impact factors at the first meeting of the Open Scholarship Initiative in Fairfax, Virginia, USA, in April 2016, and focused on the uses and misuses of the Journal Impact Factor (JIF), with a particular focus on research assessment. The workgroup’s report notes that the...Read More
Abstract The Usage Dimensions of Open workgroup came together and considered definitions and priorities around its topic. From priorities, themes were identified. One theme included the character of research outputs and the actual research workflow process. The second theme represented economic considerations. Stakeholders were identified, and solutions considered. Solutions included both short- and long-term actions....Read More