Weekly digest: what’s happening in open science?

Amy Williams

Featuring the assault by publishers’ group STM on ResearchGate, an open letter in defence of open science and the history of scholarly impact.

Publishers target ResearchGate’s ‘pirated’ papers via Science

As publishers pressure ResearchGate to remove paywalled content from their site, it is becoming clear that a new model is needed for the dissemination of research. Publishers should make it easier to share knowledge, not harder.

SPARC launches campaign to prevent the enactment of harmful copyright laws via SPARC Europe

This open letter was written to oppose harmful elements of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, a draft of which is currently under evaluation by the EU Legal Affairs Committee. The letter, supported by many prominent open access groups, argues that the law will hamper open access and open science if enacted.

How successful are funders’ open access policies? via Science Metrics

This article provides a preview of a study conducted on behalf of the European Commission with the aim of evaluating how effective open access policies are at boosting rates of open access publishing.

A victory for post-publication peer review via Retraction Watch

The story of a high-profile research paper recently published in Science that became the subject of stories by Forbes and other large news providers. The underlying data was quickly identified as flawed and caveats were posted on the online version of the paper – a testament to the importance of post-publication peer review.

Scooped: 352 years of fear via Empeerial

A look at the negative impact of ‘scooping’ on the dissemination of scholarly knowledge and the ways in which Empeerial’s platform aims to address researchers’ fears of being ‘scooped’.

Predatory journals are a waste of people, animals and money via Nature

This piece investigates the problem of predatory journals and their prevalence across the globe. It ends with a call to action – aimed at publishers, research institutions and funders – to raise awareness of these pernicious, illegitimate publications and to stem the flow of papers submitted to them.

A short history of research impact via Science Metrics

Impact assessment has been a hot topic of late. This is the story of ‘research impact’ over time, beginning in the 19th century and tracking the emergence of the ‘dog eat dog’ world of research funding that we see today.

 

Image: Spencer Wright, CC BY 2.0, Flickr
https://www.openpharma.blog/blog/weekly-digest/weekly-digest-whats-happening-in-open-science/
www.openpharma.blog
crawl=CC-MAIN-2022-49
68563
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:TNN2B4A5A7MIF5INVT62ZMCUB3RETPL3
<urn:uuid:87434a1b-8d4f-4f2f-9fc7-ba667b020d0e>
2022-12-06T11:53:36Z
77.68.75.18
text/html
sha1:JBL433234SXXYRWRCO5BMVTL4NR5F46T
<urn:uuid:7e7306d3-4eb7-495b-8068-fe246704e55d>
https://www.openpharma.blog/blog/weekly-digest/weekly-digest-whats-happening-in-open-science/
response
<urn:uuid:7a1f38fd-732e-4bde-ab14-6db6cd4a741a>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2022-49
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for November/December 2022
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-150
software: Apache Nutch 1.19 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.4-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/