1. Green Open Access
A first step to free up scientific knowledge
Daniel Graziotin, <graziotin@inf.unibz.it>
Free University of Bozen-Bolzano
2013-11-15
1

2. Scientific knowledge is not free
How it works, how it is hindered, green Open Access
The status of green Open Access
Case Study: Faculty of Computer Science, FUB
Our Contributions
Towards a free, Open Science
1
2
3
2

3. Publication and Knowledge
Expectation
10

4. Publication and Knowledge
Reality
11

5. Price for accessing an article
‣ Individuals
•
On average, $30 + VAT
12

6. Price for accessing an article?
‣ Individuals
•
On average, $30 + VAT
•
Can become ridiculous
= 30,00 € for 4 pages
= 7,50 € / page
13

7. Price for accessing an article?
‣ Institutions, Libraries
•
We do not know
•
Non-disclosure agreements
•
However, estimated revenue to the
industry: $5333 per article1
[1] http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2012/12/19/taylor-cost-publish-gold-open-access/
14

8. Scientific knowledge gets
hindered by those who
should spread it.
15

9. Where does revenue go?
16

10. Where does revenue go?
All to the publisher
Few of them invest in research association
Authors
Institution
Publisher
100
0
17

11. Never-ending costs of research.
Once: realize research.
Forever: access research results.
Can we stop this, limiting the costs?
18

12. Publication and Knowledge
Reality
19

13. Publication and Knowledge
Self-archiving - green Open Access
20

14. Self-archiving – green Open Access
‣ When researchers make publicly available copies of
preprints and postprints
•
On their personal website (worst case)
•
On a university repository
•
On a (multi)disciplinary repository
‣ Legal
•
Granted in Copyright Transfer Agreements of most
publishers
21

15. (green) Open Access fosters innovation
Next two slides are taken from “Three arguments for open access”, Mike Taylor,
Department of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol
29

17. “I soon learned that many of the
papers I was interested in reading
were hidden behind expensive
pay walls. I convinced my mom to
use her credit card for a few [...]
and I learned to try different ways
of circumventing the pay walls.”
— Jack Andraka.

18. Scientific knowledge is not free
How it works, how it is hindered, green Open Access
The status of green Open Access
Case Study: Faculty of Computer Science, FUB
Our Contributions
Towards a free, Open Science
1
2
3
32

19. Status of green Open Access
The case of the Faculty of Computer Science,
Free University of Bozen-Bolzano.
33

20. The study
‣ Web questionnaire
Invited: 66
•
-
PhD Students
-
Researchers
-
Professors
•
Participated: 49
•
75% Faculty
34

21. Awareness of self-archiving
Do you know what the term "self-archiving"
means?
38

22. Awareness of self-archiving
Yes
No
37.5
62.5
% of
answers
39

23. Awareness of self-archiving artifacts
Can you clearly differentiate the terms "preprint",
"postprint", and "publisher PDF"?
40

24. Awareness of self-archiving artifacts
Yes
No
35.4
64.6
% of
answers
41

25. After previous question
Definitions of preprint, postprint, and publisher
PDF were given
42

26. Awareness of self-archiving allowance
Did you know that the major publishers in
Computer Science1 allow you to self-archive at
least the preprints of a research article?
[1] ACM, IEEE, INFORMS, Elsevier, ME Sharpe, Palgrave Macmillan, Springer Verlag, John
Wiley and Sons
43

27. Awareness of self-archiving allowance
Yes
No
45.5
54.5
% of
answers
44

28. Self-archiving frequency
With respect to your previous publications, how
often have you self-archived the preprint, the
postprint, and the publisher PDF?
45

29. Self-archiving Frequency
‣ % of answers
Preprint
Postprint
100
Publisher PDF
100
100
72.7
63.6
61.3
50
50
50
20.5
18.2
18.2
15.9
9.1
0
0
18.2
0
46

30. Self-archiving inhibitors
What prevents you to self-archive your scientific
articles?
49

31. Self-archiving inhibitors
‣ Lack of process support (51%)
Time consuming (23%)
•
-
Too busy
Laziness (18%)
•
-
Not wanting to just start
Lack of tools (10%)
•
-
Help needed in managing the process
-
Help needed in understanding the rules
-
Lack of automation
50

32. Self-archiving inhibitors
‣ Misunderstanding / Misinformation (44%)
Afraid of breaking the rules (18%)
•
-
Violating publisher rules
-
Violating someone’s copyright
Why should I? (10%)
•
-
Lack in understanding that access to articles is not universal
-
Lack in understanding that postprint is the final article
-
Carelessness
51

33. Self-archiving inhibitors
‣ Misunderstanding / Misinformation (44%) (cont.)
•
Did not know before (8%)
•
Afraid of plagiarism (8%)
‣ Other (5%)
•
Not proud of previous work
•
Want to hide my research
52

34. Scientific knowledge is not free
How it works, how it is hindered, green Open Access
The status of green Open Access
Case Study: Faculty of Computer Science, FUB
Our Contributions
Towards a free, Open Science
1
2
3
53

35. Our contribution
‣ Inference from case study and personal experience
•
Misunderstanding / Misinformation
•
Lack of process support
Reaction
‣ Advocating
‣ rchiveit
54

36. Our contribution
‣ A Web tool, http://rchive.it
‣ Responsive (smartphone and tablet friendly)
‣ Open Source (BSD 3-Clause License)
‣ Mission
•
Create awareness
•
Spread practice
Of green Open Access
‣ Provide immediate, minimal info on author rights
55

37. Our contribution
1. Scientists input the name of a scientific venue
•
Journal name
•
Publisher name
•
ISSN number
2. The system fetches the info from SHERPA/RoMEO
3. The system displays the essential, relevant info
•
4 + 1 View of green Open Access
4. Scientists learn, and react
56

38. rchiveit
57

39. rchiveit
Three Views - Permissions
58

40. rchiveit
Fourth View - Conditions
59

41. rchiveit
+1 View – Further Information
60

42. Should we stop here?
‣ Absolutely not!
‣ Tools to automate self-archiving
‣ Collaboration with the Library
‣ Collaboration with politics
‣ Incentives for Open Access
•
Green, Gold, and Hybrid
61

43. Should we stop here?
‣ Absolutely not!
‣ Open Data
‣ Publishing research outputs
‣ Making software citable
‣ Publishing negative results
62

44. Should we stop here?
‣ Absolutely not!
‣ We need help.
‣ http://task3.cc , graziotin@inf.unibz.it
63

45. One survey response
We [..] are all well aware that [..] scientific publications are often
not considered [..] as the physical carriers of new scientific
knowledge [..] but as goods that are placed on the market in order
to be bought and sold.
The more of these goods you are able to sell, the more you can
count on funds for your lab/institution and research activity, as
well as on new personal career possibility [..]
64

46. Thank you for your attention
65