1

Green Open AccessA first step to free up scientific knowledge

Daniel Graziotin, <graziotin@inf.unibz.it>

Free University of Bozen-Bolzano

2013-11-15

2

Scientific knowledge is not freeHow it works, how it is hindered, green Open Access

The status of green Open AccessCase Study: Faculty of Computer Science, FUB

Our ContributionsTowards a free, Open Science

1

2

3

10Expectation

Publication and Knowledge

11Reality

Publication and Knowledge

12

‣ Individuals

• On average, $30 + VAT

Price for accessing an article

13

‣ Individuals

• On average, $30 + VAT

• Can become ridiculous

Price for accessing an article?

= 30,00 € for 4 pages= 7,50 € / page

14

‣ Institutions, Libraries

• We do not know

• Non-disclosure agreements

• However, estimated revenue to the

industry: $5333 per article1

Price for accessing an article?

[1] http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2012/12/19/taylor-cost-publish-gold-open-access/

15

Scientific knowledge gets hindered by those who should spread it.

16

Where does revenue go?

17

Where does revenue go?

0100

Authors

Institution

Publisher

All to the publisherFew of them invest in research association

18

Never-ending costs of research.

Once: realize research.

Forever: access research results.

Can we stop this, limiting the costs?

19

Publication and Knowledge

Reality

20

Publication and Knowledge

Self-archiving - green Open Access

21

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

29

(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

“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.

32

Scientific knowledge is not freeHow it works, how it is hindered, green Open Access

The status of green Open AccessCase Study: Faculty of Computer Science, FUB

Our ContributionsTowards a free, Open Science

1

2

3

33

Status of green Open AccessThe case of the Faculty of Computer Science,

Free University of Bozen-Bolzano.

34

The study

‣ Web questionnaire

• Invited: 66

- PhD Students

- Researchers

- Professors

• Participated: 49

• 75% Faculty

38

Awareness of self-archivingDo you know what the term "self-archiving"

means?

39

Awareness of self-archiving

62.5

37.5

Yes

No

% of

answers

40

Awareness of self-archiving artifactsCan you clearly differentiate the terms "preprint",

"postprint", and "publisher PDF"?

41

Awareness of self-archiving artifacts

35.4

64.6

Yes

No

% of

answers

42

After previous questionDefinitions of preprint, postprint, and publisher

PDF were given

43

Awareness of self-archiving allowanceDid 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

44

Awareness of self-archiving allowance

54.545.5

Yes

No

% of

answers

45

Self-archiving frequencyWith respect to your previous publications, how

often have you self-archived the preprint, the

postprint, and the publisher PDF?

46

Self-archiving Frequency

‣ % of answers

Preprint Postprint Publisher PDF

72.7

18.2

9.1

0

50

100

61.3

20.5 18.2

0

50

100

63.6

15.9 18.2

0

50

100

49

Self-archiving inhibitorsWhat prevents you to self-archive your scientific

articles?

50

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

51

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

52

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

53

Scientific knowledge is not freeHow it works, how it is hindered, green Open Access

The status of green Open AccessCase Study: Faculty of Computer Science, FUB

Our ContributionsTowards a free, Open Science

1

2

3

54

Our contribution

‣ Inference from case study and personal experience

• Misunderstanding / Misinformation

• Lack of process support

Reaction

‣ Advocating

‣ rchiveit

55

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

56

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

57

rchiveit

58

rchiveitThree Views - Permissions

59

rchiveitFourth View - Conditions

60

rchiveit+1 View – Further Information

61

Should we stop here?

‣ Tools to automate self-archiving

‣ Collaboration with the Library

‣ Collaboration with politics

‣ Incentives for Open Access

• Green, Gold, and Hybrid

‣ Absolutely not!

62

Should we stop here?

‣ Open Data

‣ Publishing research outputs

‣ Making software citable

‣ Publishing negative results

‣ Absolutely not!

63

Should we stop here?

‣ We need help.

‣ http://task3.cc , graziotin@inf.unibz.it

‣ Absolutely not!

64

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 [..]

One survey response

65

Thank you for your attention