Deceptive publishing (also known as predatory publishing) has been a growing problem in scholarly publishing for years now. What do we know about it? What do we still need to know about it? How should the scholarly community respond?Read More

Plan S is an ambitious, EU-based effort attempting to accelerate the global transition to open access. While this plan isn’t the only one trying to improve open, or the first, it has generated much interest and discussion. Some in OSI support Plan S as written. Others support it with minor changes. Still others support the...Read More

Danny Kingsley, Head of Scholarly Communication at University of Cambridge recaps an annual academically related, publisher oriented conference held in central London early this year.  The take presents an interesting kaleidoscope of issues, comments and conversations charting various aspects of scholarly publication through a 2-day conference that develops important perspectives beyond the faculty lounge and...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