Who's afraid dell'openaccess? | Open Knowledge Foundation Italy - Knowledge Free for all

abernard102@gmail.com 2014-04-11

Summary:

[From Google's English] "In the October issue of the journal Science John Bohannon published an article entitled " Who's afraid of Peer Review "for the purpose of showing when it was inefficient control over the quality of Open Access publications. The answers were not long in coming. The paper became the father of a multitude of posts by many researchers. One of these, very detailed, it is equally provocatively titled " Who's Afraid of Open Access "and bore the signature of Ernesto Priego , Course Director of Electronic Publishing at City University of London. Priego showed clearly the many shortcomings in the method of Bohannon. This was not a comparative check between OpenAccess magazines and the more classical subscription based. Was not present a horizontal control with respect to different research disciplines, such as Humanities, with respect to which the comparative control could be weighed. There were no clear criteria for the selection of fake submissions that could represent a solid basis to support the hypothesis of the article. From a purely scientific point of view, the paper did not provide any evidence with respect to the quality of the publications OpenAccess if not a trivial result: we need more control over peer review. A result that, on the other hand, seems common to all the journals, including Science ... For this reason, the challenge of Priego, and all those who helped to raise his voice in defense dell'openaccess should not be closed in the simple provocation. As he wrote recently David Eaves, OpenData advocate in Canada, read the criticism is important. It helps us to better formulate our arguments, it makes us smarter and better, because more responsible. The criticism also helps us to keep a memory of the events, but only if these are helping to create topics for debate ... Be more critical - to argue that there is something to be opened, in this case access to scientific publications, is a political claim of social interests. Accordingly should be treated as such, declaring openly and without fear. Why transparency becomes even and especially discovering and explaining the cards in a reasonable manner because it is better to decide rather than x and y. In the case of normal science is to be against the OpenAccess because it is in defense of their business model. But the strategy of the peacock will not work if your model is subscription-based framework, already undermined by the presence of national and Community which require the publication open for research funded with public money. The quality of the mechanism fades into the background when the point is to choose whether to change the template that produces and distributes research or not. Turn the tension in cohesion - within dell'openaccess there is a real tension. We agree on the need to accelerate the knowledge transfer in all fields of research-from the natural sciences to the humanities. On the other hand, there is unanimous disagreement on the business model: to convey the value of OA must also provide a model that does not face the costs fall on only one of the actors and giving benefit to all parties involved-publishers, institutions and researchers., readers, investors. Make the political choice lets achieve a fundamental point: whatever the solution, if it is not shared is doomed to fail in the bud. If you do not agree with the action because no action can be successful, because they fail to actual contributions. Break down the walls - research problems do not affect the researchers until the researchers are not affected by the problems. And from experience, you never make a mad researcher. But tend to be lazy, until they find a tool to fight. Here we propose one, easy, fast, and effective. It's called 'OpenAccessButton', a button to add to the bookmark bar of your browser that allows you to report every time you encounter a paywall. The paywall is the page that requires payment for the vision of a publication. The project , which has been online for a few months, is open source and allow it to quantify the demand for access to publications closed. Together, also to raise awareness within the same community from which the question dell'Openaccess should emerge more strongly."

Link:

http://it.okfn.org/2014/04/04/chi-ha-paura-dellopenaccess/

From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » abernard102@gmail.com

Tags:

oa.new oa.comment oa.gold oa.fees oa.publishers oa.business_models oa.quality oa.credibility oa.predatory oa.recommendations oa.advocacy oa.oa_button oa.italian oa.journals

Date tagged:

04/11/2014, 07:21

Date published:

04/11/2014, 03:21