News: Academic Publishing Weekly

International Open Access Week, University of Cincinnati Press announces closure, and tracking publishers' responses to "high risk" articles

Posted on October 25, 2024 in News

Open Access Week: “Community over Commercialization”

Happy International Open Access Week! To commemorate this year’s theme of “Community over Commercialization,” the non-profit organization SPARC highlighted several events. Topics include the relationship between OA and AI, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and data reuse rights. SPARC also underscored the importance of supporting Diamond Open Access models and encouraged the community to get involved using the hashtag #OAweek. For those interested in how other organizations are approaching OA, the Open Access Week website includes an “expanded set of profiles detailing how organizations embody the theme of ‘Community over Commercialization’ in their work.” [Open Access Week Blog]

---

---

UTP Acquires Legas Publishing and the University of Cincinnati Press to Close Next Year

The University of Toronto Press (UTP) has acquired multilingual publisher Legas Publishing. Legas Publishing’s catalogue dates back to 1987 and centers on the humanities and social sciences. Antonia Pop, Vice President of the Publishing Division at UTP, shared that, “In addition to strengthening our cultural studies offerings, many books in this catalogue are currently only available in print, and we are excited to offer multiple formats to reach a wider audience.” In other UP news, the University of Cincinnati Press (UCP) will cease operations next June. The University of Cincinnati revealed that “Funding resources, including start-up funds, have been exhausted and the press is not in a self-sustaining financial position.” However, UCP director and acquiring editor Elizabeth Scarpelli noted a lack of long-term support for the press and its limited backlist. The University of Minnesota Press will take on UCP’s print and digital titles. Ohio University Press will manage the press’s regional books.  

---

AI’s Impact on Citations and Creators Oppose AI Training on Unlicensed Work

Nature looks at a recent report published in Nature Human Behaviour (subscription required) that finds that papers referencing AI methods “are more likely to be among the top 5% most-cited works in their field for a given year.” Across the 19 disciplines examined, STEM fields including computer science had the most AI use, while disciplines like history had the least. However, of note, authors from traditionally underrepresented groups did not reap the same citation benefits. The report also does not consider the impact of ChatGPT, as its analysis includes papers published between 1960 and 2019. Next up, the Human Artistry Campaign, a coalition supporting AI best practices for creators, garnered over 10,000 signatures on an AI training statement. The statement reads, “The unlicensed use of creative works for training generative AI is a major, unjust threat to the livelihoods of the people behind those works, and must not be permitted.” Signatories include authors, actors, and, recently, the Association of American Publishers (AAP).  

---

---

Science Integrity Website Tracks “High Risk” Papers

Following its September launch, the science integrity website Argos is providing a fuller picture of publishers’ ratios of retractions to “high risk” articles. Argos, from Nevada-based technology firm Scitility, provides papers with a “risk score” based on the “authors’ publication records, and on whether the paper heavily cites already-retracted research.” As one may predict given the publisher’s issues with paper mills, Hindawi holds the most retracted papers, and Argos found a considerable amount of high-risk articles from Elsevier, MDPI, and Springer Nature. MDPI publishing manager Jisuk Kang noted, however, that large publishers “inevitably have higher numbers of high-risk papers, so that the share of output is a better metric.” Argos has identified over 40,000 high-risk papers thus far and plans to create a specialized tool to help publishers screen publications. [Nature]

---

Physical Science Researchers Face Data Sharing Barriers

Barriers persist when it comes to following the FAIR data principles despite many physical sciences researchers sharing their data openly. Looking at more than 30,000 articles in a recent white paper, IOP Publishing found that “only one in ten physical science researchers share Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR) data alongside their published articles.” Environmental scientists reported the highest rates of compliance. On the other hand, physicists, engineers, and materials scientists underlined issues with confidentiality, available repositories, and accessibility. For instance, 70 percent of materials scientists reported sharing data openly, but only 5 percent adhered to the FAIR principles. In response, Daniel Keirs, IOPP’s Head of Journal Strategy and Performance, stated, “We need to re-think several key areas, such as the standardisation of data formats, proprietary data issues, data repositories and how we incentivise data sharing.” [Library Technology]

---

Can Transformative Agreements Bolster Research Integrity?

Scholarly Kitchen chef Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe has made a case for utilizing transformative agreements (TAs) to uphold research integrity. Specifically, Hinchliffe suggests that TA terms could incorporate “designated contacts for misconduct investigations, mutual commitments to ethical guidelines, and penalties for non-compliance.” Hinchliffe argues that these terms can help establish clear investigatory protocols, allow publishers and institutions to better share resources, and encourage accountability. Furthermore, Hinchliffe speculates that universities “would be more likely to invest in training and resources to address research integrity concerns proactively if they were contractually obligated to do so through their publishing agreements.” [The Scholarly Kitchen]

---

Related Posts