I’ve just published a preprint on F1000 Research of a new article on community-led publishing projects at the University of Cambridge. It’s co-authored with Dr. Mandy Wigdorowitz at the University of Alabama. Title: “I just very much love the journal”: Understanding the community-led publishing landscape at the University of Cambridge DOI: https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.161163.1 Abstract: Background A …
Author archives: Samuel Moore
CFP: special issue of JEP on open research for the humanities and social sciences
I’m guest editing a special issue for the Journal of Electronic Publishing on open research for the humanities and social sciences. The call for papers is below: Call for papers: Special Issue on Open Research for the Humanities and Social Sciences Abstract submission deadline: 30 January 2025 In recent years, research production and communication in …
Continue reading “CFP: special issue of JEP on open research for the humanities and social sciences”
New article in New Formations on supporting editorial labour for ethical publishing within the university
Today Janneke Adema and I published a new article in the journal New Formations entitled ‘‘Just One Day of Unstructured Autonomous Time’: Supporting Editorial Labour for Ethical Publishing within the University’. The article will be available in our repositories but is also currently freely accessible via the New Formations site: https://journals.lwbooks.co.uk/newformations/vol-2023-issue-110/abstract-9909/ (although I’m not sure …
Should open access be removed from REF requirements?
In the past week, three senior research strategy figures at the University of Oxford have called for removing the open access ‘burden’ from the rules for the next Research Excellence Framework (REF). For the past REF excercise, open access has been a requirement for all submitted journal articles and UKRI are also now consulting on …
Continue reading “Should open access be removed from REF requirements?”
Research integrity, preprints and where should the responsibility lie?
Last week, The Scholarly Kitchen posted an article by Angela Cochran,Vice President of Publishing at the American Society of Clinical Oncology, about the inability of publishers to deal with research fraud. She writes: “The bottom line is that journals are not equipped with their volunteer editors and reviewers, and non-subject matter expert staff to police …
Continue reading “Research integrity, preprints and where should the responsibility lie?”
Nothing to lose but our tiny royalty cheques: on the proposed open access books policy for the next REF
Open access policy mandates have never been an effective way of convincing researchers of the benefits of exploring alternative, open publishing practices. Forcing someone to do something will not help them engage with the reasons for doing it. Instead, the mandate feels like a simple tickbox exercise that can be ignored once fulfilled. Apathy and …
What’s so bad about consolidation in academic publishing?
Today’s Scholarly Kitchen blog post is an attempt by David Crotty — the blog’s editor — to quantify the increasing consolidation of the academic publishing industry. Crotty concludes: Overall, the market has significantly consolidated since 2000 — when the top 5 publishers held 39% of the market of articles to 2022 where they control 61% …
Continue reading “What’s so bad about consolidation in academic publishing?”
How to cultivate good closures: ‘scaling small’ and the limits of openness
Text of a talk given to the COPIM end-of-project conference: “Scaling Small: Community-Owned Futures for Open Access Books”, April 20th 2023 Open access publishing has always had a difficult relationship with smoothness and scale. Openness implies seamlessness, limitlessness or structureless-ness – or the idea that the removal of price and permission barriers is what’s needed …
Continue reading “How to cultivate good closures: ‘scaling small’ and the limits of openness”
Preprints and the futures of peer review
Yesterday, the preprint repositories bioRxiv/medRxiv and arXiv released coordinated statements on the recent memo on open science from the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. While welcoming the memo, the repositories claim that the ‘rational choice’ for making research immediately accessible would be to mandate preprints for all federally funded research. They write: …
New preprint: the politics of rights retention
I’ve just uploaded ‘The Politics of Rights Retention’ to my Humanities Commons site: https://hcommons.org/deposits/item/hc:52287/. The article is a preprint of a commentary currently under consideration for a special issue on open access publishing. Abstract This article presents a commentary on the recent resurgence of interest in the practice of rights retention in scholarly publishing. Led …
Continue reading “New preprint: the politics of rights retention”