[searchandfilter id="99"]

AuthorDominic Mitchell

Guide to Creative Commons for Humanities and Social Science Monograph Authors

This guide explores concerns expressed in public evidence given by researchers, learned societies and publishers to inquiries in the House of Commons and the House of Lords, and also concerns expressed by researchers working with the OAPEN-UK project. We have also identified a number of common questions and have drafted answers, which have been checked by experts including Creative Commons. The guide has been edited by active researchers, to make sure that it
is relevant and useful to academics faced with making decisions about publishing.

Open Science Training Handbook

An open, living handbook on Open Science training. High-quality training is fundamental when aiming for a cultural change towards the implementation of Open Science principles. Teaching resources provide great support for Open Science instructors and trainers. The Open Science training handbook will be a key resource and a first step towards developing Open Access and Open Science curricula and andragogies.

Alternative routes to scholarly articles and research outputs

This is a post from the open access blog, OpenAccess.se, written by Camilla Smith. ‘Many scholarly and peer-reviewed articles can be read open access today on the web. A number of free services and archives have developed tools and services helping users to discover research output in an easy and simple way: through installing a browser extension or plug-in; by using academic search engines and archives, or, by contacting the author directly.’ The blog post lists a selection of services and ways to find scientific articles.

Think. Check. Attend.

Think. Check. Attend. is an initiative that aims to guide and assist researchers and scholars to judge the legitimacy and academic credentials of conferences in order to help them decide whether to or not attend the same. Nowadays, the scholarly community faces an increasing number of invitations to present at or attend conferences. Some of these are respectable, academic events, while others are misleading, exaggerated or even fake. Think. Check. Attend. provides guidelines that help researchers to differentiate between an authentic conference and the one they should avoid. In this initiative, we help scholars to recognise the characteristics of a trusted conference to attend and submit their abstracts through a number of steps and a check list. Simply follow these steps and you will rest assured that you attend only the most appropriate conferences.

University Grants Commission (UGC) Approved List of Journals

This list of approved journals was put together by the University Grants Commission of India in an attempt to help Indian researchers stay away from scams, frauds and fakes. While it is a worth attempt, it is not without its detractors, some of whom say that the list includes more than 100 questionable journals.

FOSTER – Facilitate Open Science Training for European Research

The FOSTER portal is an e-learning platform that brings together the best training resources addressed to those who need to know more about Open Science, or need to develop strategies and skills for implementing Open Science practices in their daily workflows.

Confessions of an Open Access Advocate – Leslie Chan

As one of the original signatories of the Budapest Open Access Initiative, a historical and defining event of the global open access movement, Leslie Chan has been active in the experimentation and implementation of scholarly communication initiatives of varying scales around the world for the last twenty years. However, in this post, Leslie confesses that his advocacy efforts have not gone as hoped.

Published on the Open and Collaborative Science in Development Network (OCSDNet) blog.

Responsible research publication: international standards for editors

A position statement, published by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), developed at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity,
Singapore, July 22-24, 2010 by Sabine Kleinert & Elizabeth Wager. An old one but a good one!

The Truth about China’s Cash-for-Publication Policy

The first study of payments to Chinese scientists for publishing in high-impact journals has serious implications for the future of research. The first link is an article, written in MIT Technology Review in July 12 2017, based on the research published in the article at the 2nd link. The authors are Wei Quan, Bikun Chen, Fei Shu.

Discriminating Between Legitimate and Predatory Open Access Journals: Report from the International Federation for Emergency Medicine Research Committee

Discriminating between predatory and legitimate OA publishers is difficult. [The authors] searched a number of library indexing databases that were available… through the University of California, Irvine Libraries for journals in the field of emergency medicine (EM) [and]… categorized EM journals as legitimate or likely predatory.