---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Morgan Leigh <morgan@wirejunkie.com>
Date: 5 December 2010 11:02
Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] massive copyright theft
To: ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC@jiscmail.ac.uk
Why one would publish with someone who is in the business of restricting
access to one's work is a mystery to me.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0013636
-
"Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for
Higher Quality Research"
Abstract.
Articles whose authors have supplemented subscription-based access to
the publisher's version by self-archiving their own final draft to make
it accessible free for all on the web ("Open Access", OA) are cited
significantly more than articles in the same journal and year that have
not been made OA. Some have suggested that this "OA Advantage" may not
be causal but just a self-selection bias, because authors preferentially
make higher-quality articles OA. To test this we compared self-selective
self-archiving with mandatory self-archiving for a sample of 27,197
articles published 2002–2006 in 1,984 journals.
Conclusion.
The OA advantage is greater for the more citable articles, not because
of a quality bias from authors self-selecting what to make OA, but
because of a quality advantage, from users self-selecting what to use
and cite, freed by OA from the constraints of selective accessibility to
subscribers only. It is hoped that these findings will help motivate the
adoption of OA self-archiving mandates by universities, research
institutions and research funders.
Regards,
Morgan Leigh
PhD Candidate
School of Sociology and Social Work
University of Tasmania
On 2/12/2010 11:54 PM, Margaret Gouin wrote:
> Sebastian,
>
> I published my doctoral dissertation through a 'reputable' academic
> publishing house.
> I regret it. Quite apart from the amount of time I had to spend undoing
> all the many totally unnecessary errors the 'reputable' academic
> publishing house introduced into my original manuscript, they do not
> seem to be at all interested in promoting it. It is priced at an
> appalling and entirely unwarranted amount which puts it well outside the
> reach of most people who might otherwise have bought it. My only hope is
> that within a couple of years it will appear in paperback. Maybe. It is
> highly unlikely that I will ever see more than a paltry sum in return
> for all the work I put into it.
> I should have gone through Lulu.com or something similar, and will if I
> ever do another book.
>
> Sincerely,
> Margaret
>
>
> 2010/12/2 Sebastián <sghelerman@gmail.com <mailto:sghelerman@gmail.com>>
From: Morgan Leigh <morgan@wirejunkie.com>
Date: 5 December 2010 11:02
Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] massive copyright theft
To: ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC@jiscmail.ac.uk
Why one would publish with someone who is in the business of restricting
access to one's work is a mystery to me.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0013636
-
"Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for
Higher Quality Research"
Abstract.
Articles whose authors have supplemented subscription-based access to
the publisher's version by self-archiving their own final draft to make
it accessible free for all on the web ("Open Access", OA) are cited
significantly more than articles in the same journal and year that have
not been made OA. Some have suggested that this "OA Advantage" may not
be causal but just a self-selection bias, because authors preferentially
make higher-quality articles OA. To test this we compared self-selective
self-archiving with mandatory self-archiving for a sample of 27,197
articles published 2002–2006 in 1,984 journals.
Conclusion.
The OA advantage is greater for the more citable articles, not because
of a quality bias from authors self-selecting what to make OA, but
because of a quality advantage, from users self-selecting what to use
and cite, freed by OA from the constraints of selective accessibility to
subscribers only. It is hoped that these findings will help motivate the
adoption of OA self-archiving mandates by universities, research
institutions and research funders.
Regards,
Morgan Leigh
PhD Candidate
School of Sociology and Social Work
University of Tasmania
On 2/12/2010 11:54 PM, Margaret Gouin wrote:
> Sebastian,
>
> I published my doctoral dissertation through a 'reputable' academic
> publishing house.
> I regret it. Quite apart from the amount of time I had to spend undoing
> all the many totally unnecessary errors the 'reputable' academic
> publishing house introduced into my original manuscript, they do not
> seem to be at all interested in promoting it. It is priced at an
> appalling and entirely unwarranted amount which puts it well outside the
> reach of most people who might otherwise have bought it. My only hope is
> that within a couple of years it will appear in paperback. Maybe. It is
> highly unlikely that I will ever see more than a paltry sum in return
> for all the work I put into it.
> I should have gone through Lulu.com or something similar, and will if I
> ever do another book.
>
> Sincerely,
> Margaret
>
>
>
>
> I am currently struggling against my own ego in whether I should
> liberate my graduation thesis which I have in pdf format or keep it
> to myself until I manage to "publish" it.
>
>
-->
> I am currently struggling against my own ego in whether I should
> liberate my graduation thesis which I have in pdf format or keep it
> to myself until I manage to "publish" it.
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
No comments:
Post a Comment